Valuable Information Being Withheld From The American People

No, the government is in no way involved: Lynne Spears' Book Delayed Indefinitely

Lynne Spears' book about parenting has been delayed indefinitely, her publisher said Wednesday. Lindsey Nobles, a spokeswoman for Christian book publisher Thomas Nelson Inc., said Wednesday that the memoir by the mother of Britney Spears was put on hold last week.

She declined to comment on whether the delay was connected to the revelation that Spears' 16-year-old daughter, Jamie Lynn, is pregnant.

"I can tell you that we are standing behind Lynne and supporting her decision to be with her family at this time," Nobles told The Associated Press.

"Pop Culture Mom: A Real Story of Fame and Family in a Tabloid World" was initially scheduled for release May 11, Mother's Day.

I cannot think of a more important work for any family with young children. I certainly want to know what Lynne did so I can do the opposite.

By George, I Think They've Got It

First Things now has a blog, and they are getting the quick hitting snarky post down: Oliver Twist, Call Your Office

Here’s a tale of woe. According to this story in the American Lawyer, lawyers in Manhattan’s elite law firms—the kinds of places where partners make $1 million a year and more—are depressed because they don’t make as much money as financial professionals. Alas, it’s true. Top investment bankers have long made a multiple of what top lawyers make, and private equity types and hedge fund managers can make considerably more than that.

Apparently the differences are becoming undeniably apparent in social settings. The article describes a fund-raising auction at a private school in Manhattan: when a home-cooked meal by a famous chef was being auctioned off, the doctors dropped out of the bidding at $7,000, the lawyers at $15,000, and then the bankers, private equity and hedge fund crowd got serious and fought it out among themselves, with the winning bid coming in at $40,000.

“‘Face it, we have no status,’ says an Am Law 100 [i.e., one of the one hundred most profitable law firms in the U.S.] partner of the pecking order at his sons’ private school. ‘We go to these school functions, and this well-heeled group looks right through you. They won’t give you the time of day. You’re just one step ahead of the doorman.’”

Indeed, there is no misery so small that it cannot fill the human heart.

Brilliant.

Now all they need to do is allow comments.

Algore Our Über-Lord

Once again Spiked gets it just right:

As he flies around the world to tell people that they should fly less, or organises rock-star extravaganzas to tell the masses they should live more meekly, some sceptics have asked: ‘Who the hell does Al Gore think he is?’

Well, now we know. He seems to think he is the spokesman for the human species, the legitimate representative of every human being who has ever lived or who will ever live in the future. He thinks he and his supporters ‘control the destiny of all generations to come’, a boast that even the worst dictators in history never dared to make. Al Gore is an enviro-tyrant with delusions of global domination.

In his speech at the climate change conference in Bali last week, Gore expressed some deeply anti-democratic views. He told an audience of 1,000, including NGOs, green campaigners and journalists, as well as UN representatives and government officials, that they should ‘feel a sense of exhilaration that we are the people alive at a moment in history when we can make all the difference’. He suggested the audience should not be worried about being seen as a minority, a tiny brave group that recognises the ‘planetary emergency’ facing Earth and its inhabitants, but rather should consider it a ‘privilege to be alive at a moment when a relatively small group of people could control the destiny of all generations to come’

Actually, in some ways Algore is a doctrinaire Leninist in his belief in himself as the head of a "vanguard party" which will lead the great unwashed into a glorious future. Of course that requires the elimination of the recalcitrant, which in practice has generally meant most everyone alive above a certain age. (Older folks don't take too kindly to the necessary re-education.)

Gore opened his speech in Bali with the words: ‘We, the human species…’ Nothing better sums up his megalomaniacal delusions than those four words. American governments have claimed to speak for ‘We, the people’ (some with more right and legitimacy than others). Outside of the democratic process, tyrannical leaders have often claimed to represent ‘the nation’ or ‘the masses’: apparently they have some special emotional insight into what the people need and desire. But no one has ever claimed to represent the human species before.

Unlike those who merely represent a people or a nation, the self-described representatives of the human species, that ‘relatively small group’ of privileged warriors for planetkind, have a blank cheque to do and say as they please. Legitimate representatives of the people are dependent on the people’s support: they are confined and directed by the electoral process. Representatives of the nation are restricted by borders: their writ extends only to the ends of their sovereign territory. But a wannabe representative of the human species like Al Gore recognises no democratic mandate or territorial border, because he thinks he represents every human being who has ever existed, who exists now, and who will exist in the future: the species itself. Gore’s mandate is timeless and borderless, and it most certainly does not require the rubber-stamping of the mass of the population, that relatively large group of people who apparently do not appreciate the urgency of today’s ‘planetary emergency’.

Just imagine what authority you can command when anyone who wants to disagree with you can be labelled as an "enemy of the species." Presumably, anyone who disagree with Algore can be treated as if they were a rabid dog and be "put down" in the name of the common good. After all as Gore has repeatedly said, "The debate is over." Everything must then be sacrificed to the nexus of environmentalism and action; everything including rationality, personal autonomy, political liberty, and freedom of conscience.

It's a brave new world indeed.

Paths Of Least (Ideological) Resistence

I always like it when I come across something that frames an issue in a different way:

But more interesting to me are the surprising consequences of the ideological bias of our universities. The bias has done a great deal to help staff the think tanks of the Right. Sinecures of academia unavailable, a conservative intellectual is practically forced to find a public voice. The same holds for students. A liberal student is on ideological welfare. The entire university is set up to support his or her causes. The conservatively-minded students must be entrepreneurial. If they don’t start their own organizations, then their positions go unheard.

Thus the law of unintended consequences. It seems rather obvious to me that the vibrant organizational and intellectual potency of contemporary conservatism is largely due to the transparent and relentless Leftism of the academy. Deny a podium to smart, motivated folks who hold positions consistently preferred by more than 50% of American voters, and they will find other outlets. And furthermore, removed from the relative insularity and softening wealth of the contemporary university, those same conservative intellectuals will need to be nimble, articulate, and energetic in order to survive.

It does seem to me that students of a left leaning persuasion are increasingly unable to articulate their positions well. That may be precisely because they are so unchallenged in the university environment. I would no longer dare to forcefully take on a leftist student's predisposed notions because they lack the tools to defend themselves and I would just come across as a bully. I fall back on my ability to cajole even though I realize that that comes across as a lack of seriousness. My hope is I can get to know some students well enough that I can be more forthright and direct with them.

It's quite sad when you think about it. As a result I try not to.

What Is A Forecast?

Just following up on my earlier post of the dissembling and games being played with hurricane "forecasts" by insurance industry lapdog RMS. Basically, Roger Pielke asked RMS if they are standing by their forecast of a 40% increase on insured losses due to hurricanes for the time period 2006-2010, after both 2006 and 2007 resulted in below average losses. From Prometheus:

Yes, we do stand by that forecast, although I should point out that we update the forecast every year, so the 2005 forecast (for 2006-2010) is now 2 years out of date. Apart from questions of forecast accuracy, there's no particular reason for any of our users to use the 2005 forecast at this point (that would be like using a weather forecast from last week).

Think about this for a second. The RMS "forecast" was used by insurance companies as an excuse to raise the rates consumers pay for coverage, because they called for a 40% increase in damages. The original RMS forecast has, to this point, been off by a factor of 20. Actually losses have been 95% less than RMS forecast. But RMS claims, that's okay, because they now have a new forecast which raises losses by another 40%! Based on what exactly? Because the old forecasts have proven so inaccurate?????

The "logic" presented is that we need not evaluate the old forecasts because new forecasts are available. What garbage. You can only evaluate any methodology based upon past results. You make a prediction and then you compare that prediction to actual events. Period. But, using RMS' rules, their methodology can never be evaluated because they will always be issuing new "forecasts." Baloney. A forecast for the period 2006-2010 is not "out of date," because we haven't reached 2010 yet. Period. A new forecast for the dates 2008-2012 doesn't take the place of the older forecast because it covers a different period of time. It is a forecast of something else.

RMS' response wasn't complete nonsense, however:

One curious property of the loss distribution is that it is very skewed. As a result the real losses would be expected to fall below the mean in most years. This is compensated for in the average by occasional years with very high losses.

Yes, that is obviously the case. Two years of low loss totals does not mean you can say there is a "trend" towards less loss occurring generally, any more than a Katrina type event can allow you to make the opposite conclusion. The point is RMS has to be committed to the 2006-2010 forecast win, lose or draw. It seems unlikely that they will be able to make the case for their 40% increase, barring another Katrina. If their "forecast" fails and RMS and the insurance industry don't take that into account, then they are engaged in nothing but an attempt to bilk their customers.

Dan Fogelberg 1951-2007

AP Reports:

Dan Fogelberg, the singer and songwriter whose hits "Leader of the Band" and "Same Old Lang Syne" helped define the soft-rock era, died Sunday at his home in Maine after battling prostate cancer. He was 56.

His death was announced Sunday on the singer's Web site.

"Dan left us this morning at 6 a.m. He fought a brave battle with cancer and died peacefully at home in Maine with his wife, Jean, at his side," it read. "His strength, dignity and grace in the face of the daunting challenges of this disease were an inspiration to all who knew him."

Fogelberg discovered he had advanced prostate cancer in 2004. In a statement then, he thanked fans for their support: "It is truly overwhelming and humbling to realize how many lives my music has touched so deeply all these years. ... I thank you from the very depths of my heart."

Fogelberg's music was powerful in its simplicity. He didn't rely on the volume of his voice to convey his emotions; instead, they came through in the soft, tender delivery and his poignant lyrics. Songs like "Same Old Lang Syne" -- in which a man reminisces after meeting an old girlfriend by chance during the holidays -- became classics not only because of his performance, but also for the engaging storyline.

Fogelberg's heyday was in the 1970s and early '80s, when he scored several platinum and multiplatinum records fueled by such hits as "The Power of Gold" and "Leader of the Band," a touching tribute he wrote to his father, a bandleader.

This saddens me. I recently bought a new turntable and had been enjoying the LP's I still had that never got replaced by the equivalent CD. One I listened to just the other day was Fogelberg's Windows and Walls. I hadn't heard the album in maybe 12 years but I found I still had it in the memory banks. That speaks to Fogelberg's quality as a songwriter. I preferred his folk/pop leaning material to his more western/country stuff, and my pop music tastes drifted in another direction over the years. But he was a large part of my teenage music listening, and I remember fondly seeing him play a great show at the Fox Theater in St. Louis.

Rest in peace.

The One Step, Two Step

It is a simple plan. It only requires two steps: A) Destroy the economy, and B) Impose a neo-fascist state to do away with messy democratic governance. The only trouble they are having is, usually, you need a destroyed economy BEFORE you can impose the fascist state, and today you need the fascist state before you can destroy the economy.

It's a quandary.

Transport policy-makers should start preparing now for a dramatic reduction in motorised travel that will be brought about by carbon rationing, one of the country's leading environmental thinkers told LTT this week.

"Just start reading the runes because what's going to happen is the demand for road, rail and air travel is going to start falling away just as soon as we have rationing," says Mayer Hillman in an interview with the magazine.

Hillman, senior fellow emeritus at the Policy Studies Institute, says carbon rationing is the only way to ensure that the world avoids the worst effects of climate change. And he says that the problems caused by burning fossil fuels are so serious that governments might have to implement rationing against the will of the people.

"When the chips are down I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it," he says. "This has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not."

You know what advocates of liberal democratic theory (you know, folks such as John Locke, Thomas Jefferson and the like) advise in such circumstances? Armed resistance. No wonder these new fascists are even trying to ban kitchen knives in the UK.

H/T Blue Crab Boulevard

Left Wing Imperialism

Spiked has a great piece written by Nathalie Rothschild on what is really behind the western drive to give the third world "appropriate technology" instead of modern technology. It's time to unwrap ‘Oxfam Unwrapped’

Volunteers from the youth education charity WORLDwrite went to Ghana to make a series of short documentaries investigating life at the receiving end of debt relief and development initiatives. One of their films, Keeping Africa Small, which premieres at the Rich Mix cinema in London next week, challenges ‘Western “feelgood” shopping for goats and hoes’. The film crew found that the friends and strangers they met in Ghana had aspirations that are way out of line with Western development programmes that champion sustainable development and small ways of coping with poverty.

The Ghanaians interviewed in WORLDwrite’s film dream of living in concrete houses instead of mud huts; of owning washing machines instead of having to trek to a bore hole several times a day to fetch water. They want motor-powered fishing boats instead of wooden canoes, which have to be dragged to the shore by hand. They want university education, not lessons in how to use a condom; and they prefer having regular work in factories to the hand-to-mouth existence offered by NGOs’ micro-credit schemes. They do not, as the charity Water Aid argues, think that extracting water by rope pumps from hand-dug wells constitutes ‘appropriate technology’. And they do not want a goat for Christmas, thanks very much.

Yet development organisations working in the areas that WORLDwrite visited don’t seem to offer things that locals actually want. A resident in the village of Anamole received three grass-cutters from Action Aid. No, a grass-cutter is not the latest electrical lawnmower; it’s a cane rat, a rodent that is commonly reared in West Africa and which eats long grass. As one man points out in Keeping Africa Small, this is not a serious development initiative; it is a ‘pet programme’. NGOs are clearly not heeding the Anamole village chief’s call; in the film, chief Nii Ayitey Tetteh Okpe II says ‘people must come up with what they think the best solutions are for themselves so that, at the end of the day, they can take their destiny into their own hands’.

But that would work against the left's new rallying call: Human dignity for me, not for thee.

Iranians! Get Down Tonight!

Got this from the BBC:

Lady In Red star Chris De Burgh will be the first Western artist to play a concert in Iran since the country's 1979 revolution, according to reports.

Hmm...De Burgh's signature song might cause some problems. I better "tidy it up" for him.

The Lady In The Red Burqa

The lady in the red burqa
Is not dancing with me,
Cheek to cheek.
There's nobody here.
Not even me.
But I hardly know
What I'm even singin' bout.....Oooo
I'll never forget
The way I didn't see you tonight.

There....now its mullah-proofed.

The Right Blogosphere Sure Doesn't Like Huckabee...

...and maybe with good reason.

I haven't said much about the presidential candidates so far. I've been thinking about them more as a political scientist rather than someone looking for a campaign to support. I've felt Huckabee comes off pretty well on television, especially in one-on-one interviews, compared to the rest of the GOP field. Sure, it is form over substance, but that is just what political scientists do.

However, the more I learn the more it seems Huckabee has less to offer substance wise than any other GOP candidate...Ron Paul included.

That would make three GOP candidates I will have deemed unacceptable: Huckabee, Paul and McCain. (I think McCain is lukewarm on the First Amendment, which makes him a non-starter in my book.)

As for the rest? Well, let's just say no one thrills me.

It's Wrong I Enjoy This As Much As I Do

Look For The Union Label

And we'll have fun, fun, fun:

A video of a Gucci- and Louis Vuitton-clad politician attacking capitalism then struggling to explain how his luxurious clothes square with his socialist beliefs has become an instant YouTube hit in Venezuela.

Venezuelan Interior Minister Pedro Carreno was momentarily at a loss for words when a journalist interrupted his speech and asked if it was not contradictory to criticize capitalism while wearing Gucci shoes and a tie made by Parisian luxury goods maker Louis Vuitton.

"I don't, uh ... I ... of course," stammered Carreno on Tuesday before regaining his composure. "It's not contradictory because I would like Venezuela to produce all this so I could buy stuff produced here instead of 95 percent of what we consume being imported."

That's right. Remember the golden era (1946-1987) when all the Hollywood starlets walked down the red carpet of the Academy Awards sporting the latest fashions from Minsk, Moscow and Leningrad. "It's what everyone is wearing at Yalta this season!" was the watchword of high style.

Ah.....the good old days.

Maybe Gore Will Have To "Disappear" These Scientists...

...after all, he already said they didn't exist. Then who is writing letters like this?

Dec. 13, 2007

His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon

Secretary-General, United Nations

New York, N.Y.


Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.

The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by ­government ­representatives. The great ­majority of IPCC contributors and ­reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.

Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

• Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.
• The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.
• Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge that today's computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this, and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling.

In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is "settled," significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming. But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed (see http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf) to consider work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already materially outdated.

The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2 trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational to apply the "precautionary principle" because many scientists recognize that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over the medium-term future.

The current UN focus on "fighting climate change," as illustrated in the Nov. 27 UN Development Programme's Human Development Report, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and pressing problems.

Yours faithfully,

Oh I'll leave you hanging a second here. Who could have possibly written such a statement?? They must all be working for the oil industry, right?? Or the pseudo-fascist AEI, right?? It's gotta be!!!! Al Gore said so!!!!!!!!!!

Don Aitkin, PhD, Professor, social scientist, retired vice-chancellor and president, University of Canberra, Australia

William J.R. Alexander, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa; Member, UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000

Bjarne Andresen, PhD, physicist, Professor, The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Geoff L. Austin, PhD, FNZIP, FRSNZ, Professor, Dept. of Physics, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Timothy F. Ball, PhD, environmental consultant, former climatology professor, University of Winnipeg

Ernst-Georg Beck, Dipl. Biol., Biologist, Merian-Schule Freiburg, Germany

Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen, PhD, Reader, Dept. of Geography, Hull University, U.K.; Editor, Energy & Environment journal

Chris C. Borel, PhD, remote sensing scientist, U.S.

Reid A. Bryson, PhD, DSc, DEngr, UNE P. Global 500 Laureate; Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research; Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography, and of Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin

Dan Carruthers, M.Sc., wildlife biology consultant specializing in animal ecology in Arctic and Subarctic regions, Alberta

R.M. Carter, PhD, Professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia

Ian D. Clark, PhD, Professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Richard S. Courtney, PhD, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

Willem de Lange, PhD, Dept. of Earth and Ocean Sciences, School of Science and Engineering, Waikato University, New Zealand

David Deming, PhD (Geophysics), Associate Professor, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Oklahoma

Freeman J. Dyson, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.

Don J. Easterbrook, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Geology, Western Washington University

Lance Endersbee, Emeritus Professor, former dean of Engineering and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Monasy University, Australia

Hans Erren, Doctorandus, geophysicist and climate specialist, Sittard, The Netherlands

Robert H. Essenhigh, PhD, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University

Christopher Essex, PhD, Professor of Applied Mathematics and Associate Director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario

David Evans, PhD, mathematician, carbon accountant, computer and electrical engineer and head of 'Science Speak,' Australia

William Evans, PhD, editor, American Midland Naturalist; Dept. of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame

Stewart Franks, PhD, Professor, Hydroclimatologist, University of Newcastle, Australia

R. W. Gauldie, PhD, Research Professor, Hawai'i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, School of Ocean Earth Sciences and Technology, University of Hawai'i at Manoa

Lee C. Gerhard, PhD, Senior Scientist Emeritus, University of Kansas; former director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey

Gerhard Gerlich, Professor for Mathematical and Theoretical Physics, Institut für Mathematische Physik der TU Braunschweig, Germany

Albrecht Glatzle, PhD, sc.agr., Agro-Biologist and Gerente ejecutivo, INTTAS, Paraguay

Fred Goldberg, PhD, Adjunct Professor, Royal Institute of Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden

Vincent Gray, PhD, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001, Wellington, New Zealand

William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University and Head of the Tropical Meteorology Project

Howard Hayden, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Connecticut

Louis Hissink MSc, M.A.I.G., editor, AIG News, and consulting geologist, Perth, Western Australia

Craig D. Idso, PhD, Chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Arizona

Sherwood B. Idso, PhD, President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, AZ, USA

Andrei Illarionov, PhD, Senior Fellow, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity; founder and director of the Institute of Economic Analysis

Zbigniew Jaworowski, PhD, physicist, Chairman - Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland

Jon Jenkins, PhD, MD, computer modelling - virology, NSW, Australia

Wibjorn Karlen, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden

Olavi Kärner, Ph.D., Research Associate, Dept. of Atmospheric Physics, Institute of Astrophysics and Atmospheric Physics, Toravere, Estonia

Joel M. Kauffman, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia

David Kear, PhD, FRSNZ, CMG, geologist, former Director-General of NZ Dept. of Scientific & Industrial Research, New Zealand

Madhav Khandekar, PhD, former research scientist, Environment Canada; editor, Climate Research (2003-05); editorial board member, Natural Hazards; IPCC expert reviewer 2007

William Kininmonth M.Sc., M.Admin., former head of Australia's National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological organization's Commission for Climatology Jan J.H. Kop, MSc Ceng FICE (Civil Engineer Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers), Emeritus Prof. of Public Health Engineering, Technical University Delft, The Netherlands

Prof. R.W.J. Kouffeld, Emeritus Professor, Energy Conversion, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Salomon Kroonenberg, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Geotechnology, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Hans H.J. Labohm, PhD, economist, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations), The Netherlands

The Rt. Hon. Lord Lawson of Blaby, economist; Chairman of the Central Europe Trust; former Chancellor of the Exchequer, U.K.

Douglas Leahey, PhD, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary

David R. Legates, PhD, Director, Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware

Marcel Leroux, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS

Bryan Leyland, International Climate Science Coalition, consultant and power engineer, Auckland, New Zealand

William Lindqvist, PhD, independent consulting geologist, Calif.

Richard S. Lindzen, PhD, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

A.J. Tom van Loon, PhD, Professor of Geology (Quaternary Geology), Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland; former President of the European Association of Science Editors

Anthony R. Lupo, PhD, Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science, Dept. of Soil, Environmental, and Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri-Columbia

Richard Mackey, PhD, Statistician, Australia

Horst Malberg, PhD, Professor for Meteorology and Climatology, Institut für Meteorologie, Berlin, Germany

John Maunder, PhD, Climatologist, former President of the Commission for Climatology of the World Meteorological Organization (89-97), New Zealand

Alister McFarquhar, PhD, international economy, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.

Ross McKitrick, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph

John McLean, PhD, climate data analyst, computer scientist, Australia

Owen McShane, PhD, economist, head of the International Climate Science Coalition; Director, Centre for Resource Management Studies, New Zealand

Fred Michel, PhD, Director, Institute of Environmental Sciences and Associate Professor of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

Frank Milne, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Queen's University

Asmunn Moene, PhD, former head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway

Alan Moran, PhD, Energy Economist, Director of the IPA's Deregulation Unit, Australia

Nils-Axel Morner, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm University, Sweden

Lubos Motl, PhD, Physicist, former Harvard string theorist, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

John Nicol, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Physics, James Cook University, Australia

David Nowell, M.Sc., Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, former chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa

James J. O'Brien, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Meteorology and Oceanography, Florida State University

Cliff Ollier, PhD, Professor Emeritus (Geology), Research Fellow, University of Western Australia

Garth W. Paltridge, PhD, atmospheric physicist, Emeritus Professor and former Director of the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia

R. Timothy Patterson, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University

Al Pekarek, PhD, Associate Professor of Geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, Minnesota

Ian Plimer, PhD, Professor of Geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide and Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia

Brian Pratt, PhD, Professor of Geology, Sedimentology, University of Saskatchewan

Harry N.A. Priem, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Planetary Geology and Isotope Geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences

Alex Robson, PhD, Economics, Australian National University Colonel F.P.M. Rombouts, Branch Chief - Safety, Quality and Environment, Royal Netherland Air Force

R.G. Roper, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology

Arthur Rorsch, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Molecular Genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands

Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, B.C.

Tom V. Segalstad, PhD, (Geology/Geochemistry), Head of the Geological Museum and Associate Professor of Resource and Environmental Geology, University of Oslo, Norway

Gary D. Sharp, PhD, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, CA

S. Fred Singer, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia and former director Weather Satellite Service

L. Graham Smith, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario

Roy W. Spencer, PhD, climatologist, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville

Peter Stilbs, TeknD, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Research Leader, School of Chemical Science and Engineering, KTH (Royal Institute of Technology), Stockholm, Sweden

Hendrik Tennekes, PhD, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

Dick Thoenes, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

Brian G Valentine, PhD, PE (Chem.), Technology Manager - Industrial Energy Efficiency, Adjunct Associate Professor of Engineering Science, University of Maryland at College Park; Dept of Energy, Washington, DC

Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD, geologist and paleoclimatologist, climate change consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand

Len Walker, PhD, Power Engineering, Australia

Edward J. Wegman, PhD, Department of Computational and Data Sciences, George Mason University, Virginia

Stephan Wilksch, PhD, Professor for Innovation and Technology Management, Production Management and Logistics, University of Technolgy and Economics Berlin, Germany

Boris Winterhalter, PhD, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland

David E. Wojick, PhD, P.Eng., energy consultant, Virginia

Raphael Wust, PhD, Lecturer, Marine Geology/Sedimentology, James Cook University, Australia

A. Zichichi, PhD, President of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, Switzerland; Emeritus Professor of Advanced Physics, University of Bologna, Italy

Notice: all of these scientist were taking exception not with one little facet of the known research, but with enough of the fairy tale the IPCC is selling to sign on to the entire letter above.

So the next time someone tries to sell you "consenus" and Anthropogenic Global Warming remind them that,

A) Science isn't done through consensus, and
B) Even if it was, the idea that "consensus" exists on AGW is a lie.

Stick that in your carbon emitting pipe and smoke it.

H/T to Blue Crab Boulevard

Baseball's Dirty Laundry

Alright. I read the whole summary and the section where the players implicated by Kirk Radomski are enumerated. Here is my take:

I think Sen. Mitchell should be commended for doing such an even handed job in the report. It seems clear he collected a preponderance of evidence before releasing any names, and gave all of the accused a chance to tell their side of the story...if they had one.

It also becomes clear that the players from the start have been stonewalling, and not just in the sense of trying to keep illegal activities from coming to light. The players or, maybe more accurately, the Players Association have attempted to obfuscate and wrongdoing to the point that they no longer care of the integrity of the game is at stake.

For example:

1. Of the 500 former players the Mitchell investigation attempted to interview, only 68 agreed to do so. That is 13.6%.


2. The Players Association refused to supply any documentation on any matter whatsoever.


3. They refused to make chief operating officer Gene Orza available to be interviewed. (Something to hide one has to presume.)


4. They refused full access to the director of the current drug testing program.


5. They sent memos "discouraging" players from cooperating with the investigation.


6. They refused to respond to any of the specific allegations.

The report goes over all of the information on various drug related matters that have come out over the years, but there were still many things I had never heard before. For example, despite what I have heard and read numerous times, it turns out that MLB had banned all prescription drugs obtained without a valid prescription in 1971. So, while steroids were only banned by name in 1991, their use under the prior policy would have been against the rules of baseball as well.

The report seems to indicate that Gene Orza has been working to undermine the existing testing program by deliberating dragging out the mandated notification process for testing so that players could have the drugs cleared from their system by the time, several months later, when tests were actually adminstered. Mitchell is right that the oversight for the testing program should be removed from the control of the players and the owners and entrusted to an independent body. The incentives are too great for the players to "game" the system.

Of the players whose drug involvement was already open news in the press (Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi, Jeremey Giambi, Armando Rios, Gary Sheffield, Benito Santiago, Marvin Bernard, Randy Velarde and Bobby Estalella) the only thing new I learned was that Estalella was taking the female fertility drug Clomid.

I don't think I wanted to know that.

Of the new(ish) names that have come to light because of the Radomski information, a lot of them are/were marginal major leaguers. You can understand the pressure they must have felt to try to hold onto or gain a spot on the 40 man roster. It's hard to get too pissed off about those guys. The big names?? Well, its hard not to want to spit at them.

The list: (Click here for Baseball-References links to all the players mentioned in the report.)

1. Lenny Dykstra - Long rumored, now looking like a slam dunk.


2. David Segui


3. Larry Bigbie - Bigbie did say that members of the Cards clubhouse could hook him up with more drugs if he wanted them. That's real encouraging.


4. Brian Roberts - This hurts. I always admired Roberts' game.


5. Jack Cust - So much for that "breakout" season?


6. Tim Laker


7. Josias Manzanillo


8. Todd Hundley


9. Mark Carreon


10. Hal Morris


11. Matt Franco


12. Rondell White - No wonder he breaks down whenever anyone looks at him.


13. Roger Clemons - The biggest name and the proof that the steroids investigations are not just the "man" trying to keep Barry Bonds down.


14. Andy Pettite - The biggest surprise to me.


15. Chuck Knoblauch - You would have thought he would have focused more on the whole "throwing from second base to first base" problem first.


16. Jason Grimsley


17. Gregg Zaun


18. David Justice - Didn't his career seem to just pop like an over-inflated balloon?


19. F.P. Santangello


20. Glenallen Hill


21. Mo Vaughn - Didn't his career seem to just pop like an over-inflated balloon?


22. Denny Neagle - Really?


23. Ron Villone


24. Ryan Franklin - Oops.


25. Chris Donnels


26. Todd Williams


27. Phil Hiatt


28. Todd Pratt


29. Kevin Young


30. Mike Lansing


31. Cody McKay - Oops again.


32. Kent Mercker


33. Adam Piatt


34. Miguel Tejada - Enjoy Houston. Enjoy.


35. Jason Christiansen


36. Mike Stanton


37. Stephan Randolph


38. Jerry Hairston, Jr.


39. Paul Lo Duca - Too bad. Such an enjoyable player to watch.


40. Adam Riggs


41. Bart Miadich - Never heard of him.


42. Fernando Vina - Will ESPN return his calls? Or will he wind up with Harold Reynolds in Baseball Tonight purgatory?


43. Kevin Brown - He should ask for a refund.


44. Eric Gagne - A theme is delevoping.


45. Mike Bell


46. Matt Herges


47. Gary Bennett, Jr. - One more and we've hit the Cardinals backup catcher trifecta.


48. Jim Parque


49. Brendan Donnelly


50. Chad Allen


51. Jeff Williams


52. Howie Clark


53. Exavier "Nook" Logan - Always liked Nook. Damn.

The other thing I take from this report is the obvious pressure that the Player's Association has been putting on current and former players alike to keep their mouths shut. This makes the performace of Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa before Congress more understandable. Not anymore right, but more understandable. I wonder if the media that has spent so much time crucifying McGwire and Sosa will visit the same venom on all the big names in the list above? Clemons and Pettite will face a shit-storm just because they are Yankees, but there are others.

I also wonder if all the pious sportwriters who claimed they could never vote for Rafael Palmeiro for the Hall of Fame will hold the Rocket to the same standard. We will see.

This is a awful day for baseball; an awful and absolutely necessary day.

Tinker Bell Politics

It's heartbreaking...it really is. It seems Kos has descended into existential angst again: Capitulators

You'd think that for no other reason than pride, Democrats would decide to fight. I mean, they can't stop telling us how tough they are by voting for "let's bomb Iraq" and "let's bomb Iran" resolutions. But people then elect them to do such quaint things as "lead" and "fight". So what happens when they don't? Congressional ratings keep tanking, we get headlines like these, and people think, "well, Democrats sure are wimps." Actually, "wimp" would be an improvement over the word they really use, but it's not politically correct so I won't use it. But you know what it is.

If the public needs to see which party is made up of strong members, and which one is chock full of patsies, it's not too difficult to figure out. And the worst part? Republicans always knew Democrats didn't have the cojones to fight, and have sat back and laughed at all the tough talk from Reid and Pelosi.

That's what they've become. A joke.

So all that's left is to see the final "Hoyer Math". How many millions in pork is the life of each soldier worth to Democrats in DC? We know that for Republicans, our soldiers' lives have zero value. For Democrats, the Hoyer rate appears to be in the $10 million range.

One last point: The American people hate Bush -- the most unpopular president since polling began -- and consider him a weak incompetent SOB.

Then they see Democrats capitulate to him.

It seems the folks who pride themselves on their "reality based" politics have a little problem with political reality. Despite what they seem to believe, success in the political arena is not ultimately a matter of will and belief. Politics in a democratic system is fundamentally quantitative rather than qualitative. Whether you win or lose is based upon how many votes you've got, not on the purity of your ideological convictions. Convictions are fine when you voicing your opinion on your little blog, but that isn't how votes are won in Congress. The DK seems to think that "if you only believe in it hard enough, you will make it live!" So they write post after post saying "I believe we can defund the war!! I believe!!" They then look on in dismay as the beautiful purity of their ideological vision is shattered by the "you win some, you lose some" nature of political reality.

Thus the angst...the silly, petulant angst.