Van Jones was the green jobs czar. This really translated into using the climate and environment as a vehicle to obtain "social justice" ... radical left buzz words that allow you to preach marxism while not scaring people. Hello Saul Alinsky.
Todd Stern, apparently appointed by Hillary, is known as the climate czar ... although I did not know Hillary had own own czars.
I use the term "Political Scientist" to show a difference from political science. This guy, and others in washington, approach climate as a political issue, not science. This is analogous to terrorism by a dedicated large group being defined as a crime only. 911 was a murder site only, according to obama et al. Not an act of war, just a crime. By the way, if it was not an act of war, why is he fighting a war in Afghanistan against those that caused 911? Just a thought.
Anyway, Mr. Stern is another obviously brilliant (I guess it's obvious) academician that is suddenly an expert in a science ... climatology/meteorology?
Under Clinton, this was a negotiator for the Kyoto Accord, fortunately never adopted by the USA. As far as can be assessed, his background in climatology was ... let's say... non-existent. I could not find any research he has performed. He did work with the far left group Center for American Dismantling, I mean Progress. He worked with Clinton (Bill) on disclosing donors to a charitable foundation; he worked on money laundering ... that's a good climate background.
He worked on Bill Clinton's campaign and became staff secretary ... that's heavy duty climate research. I won't go on ... if you want to see his background you can view it at Time magazine, http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1874152,00.html
The point of this writing is that here is another czar that has no scientific background but wants to determine world direction of carbon use. He of course KNOWS he is right because he is doing good ... he wants to save the planet.
I m sure Mr. Stern is a great negotiator ... although I am not sure why I'm sure. This is another well educated left winger that wants to transform American society into something the people do NOT want.
Watch your czars ... they are not there to help people ... they are there to help turn America into a government paradise ... at least for the government people. More like a nightmare for the rest of us.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Saturday, September 5, 2009
A Win For America, A Loss For America Haters!!!
Van Jones, criminal turned communist, a believer that the USA brought down the twin Trade Center Buildings, someone with zero background in the environment or in any aspect of science ... resigned from his post of green jobs CZAR.
Der president, with full knowledge of Jones background and intent, appointed this creep to be green jobs czar to advise in the dismantling of the US economy and to achieve "social justice" ( read that communism).
Jones is but one example of the RADICAL left appointments of obama ... his cabinet appointees are left to far left ... his CZARS are extreme left.
Goodbye van. You will not be missed. Hit the road you creep. Let's hope your fellow America haters follow you back to Kalifornia! Go steal someone else's money.
Hey Van ... you love the marxists so much ... walk the walk ... move to Cuba. The USA should take five freedom loving Cubans for one of you. Good health care there, I understand. Please ... leave.
This is a victory for Free Speech ... something the left used to fight for but is now trying to eliminate. The Free Speechers? Glen Beck, Rush and other talk show people. Congratulations ... we won one battle ... but the war goes on.
Let's defeat extremists trying to dismantle what the USA stand for.
Der president, with full knowledge of Jones background and intent, appointed this creep to be green jobs czar to advise in the dismantling of the US economy and to achieve "social justice" ( read that communism).
Jones is but one example of the RADICAL left appointments of obama ... his cabinet appointees are left to far left ... his CZARS are extreme left.
Goodbye van. You will not be missed. Hit the road you creep. Let's hope your fellow America haters follow you back to Kalifornia! Go steal someone else's money.
Hey Van ... you love the marxists so much ... walk the walk ... move to Cuba. The USA should take five freedom loving Cubans for one of you. Good health care there, I understand. Please ... leave.
This is a victory for Free Speech ... something the left used to fight for but is now trying to eliminate. The Free Speechers? Glen Beck, Rush and other talk show people. Congratulations ... we won one battle ... but the war goes on.
Let's defeat extremists trying to dismantle what the USA stand for.
Father of Modern Climatology ... Dr. Reid Bryson
I was fortunate enough to study with and work with Dr. Bryson. He was talking about climate change and getting laughed at for even addressing the issue. Dr. Bryson received the 30 th Ph.D in Meteorology in the United States. He was a pioneer in climate research. He was to climate research what Michael Jordan was to basketball ... a game changer and superstar.
The good Doctor passed away in June 2008, and I am proud to say I knew him and learned from him.
I hope he does not mind, but I have borrowed the information below from fellow blogger THRUTCH. Please read his comments about the importance of water vapor relative to carbon dioxide.
Could he be wrong? Maybe. But listen to what he said. He was THE pioneer in climate change and climate modelling; it is amusing that he shows his disdain for models 50 to 100 years in the future by simply asking if you trust the five day forecast.
“Climate’s always been changing and it’s been changing rapidly at various times, and so something was making it change in the past,” he told us in an interview this past winter. “Before there were enough people to make any difference at all, two million years ago, nobody was changing the climate, yet the climate was changing, okay?”
“All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it’s absurd,” Bryson continues. “Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.”
...
Q: Could you rank the things that have the most significant impact and where would you put carbon dioxide on the list?
A: Well let me give you one fact first. In the first 30 feet of the atmosphere, on the average, outward radiation from the Earth, which is what CO2 is supposed to affect, how much [of the reflected energy] is absorbed by water vapor? In the first 30 feet, 80 percent, okay?
Q: Eighty percent of the heat radiated back from the surface is absorbed in the first 30 feet by water vapor…
A: And how much is absorbed by carbon dioxide? Eight hundredths of one percent. One one-thousandth as important as water vapor. You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.
This begs questions about the widely publicized mathematical models researchers run through supercomputers to generate climate scenarios 50 or 100 years in the future. Bryson says the data fed into the computers overemphasizes carbon dioxide and accounts poorly for the effects of clouds—water vapor. Asked to evaluate the models’ long-range predictive ability, he answers with another question: “Do you believe a five-day forecast?”
The good Doctor passed away in June 2008, and I am proud to say I knew him and learned from him.
I hope he does not mind, but I have borrowed the information below from fellow blogger THRUTCH. Please read his comments about the importance of water vapor relative to carbon dioxide.
Could he be wrong? Maybe. But listen to what he said. He was THE pioneer in climate change and climate modelling; it is amusing that he shows his disdain for models 50 to 100 years in the future by simply asking if you trust the five day forecast.
“Climate’s always been changing and it’s been changing rapidly at various times, and so something was making it change in the past,” he told us in an interview this past winter. “Before there were enough people to make any difference at all, two million years ago, nobody was changing the climate, yet the climate was changing, okay?”
“All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it’s absurd,” Bryson continues. “Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.”
...
Q: Could you rank the things that have the most significant impact and where would you put carbon dioxide on the list?
A: Well let me give you one fact first. In the first 30 feet of the atmosphere, on the average, outward radiation from the Earth, which is what CO2 is supposed to affect, how much [of the reflected energy] is absorbed by water vapor? In the first 30 feet, 80 percent, okay?
Q: Eighty percent of the heat radiated back from the surface is absorbed in the first 30 feet by water vapor…
A: And how much is absorbed by carbon dioxide? Eight hundredths of one percent. One one-thousandth as important as water vapor. You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.
This begs questions about the widely publicized mathematical models researchers run through supercomputers to generate climate scenarios 50 or 100 years in the future. Bryson says the data fed into the computers overemphasizes carbon dioxide and accounts poorly for the effects of clouds—water vapor. Asked to evaluate the models’ long-range predictive ability, he answers with another question: “Do you believe a five-day forecast?”
Global Warming Begins ... 1680
Here is a link to a 2007 interview with Climatologist Timothy Ball. This is one man's opinion, I understand that. And, I agree with the necessity of ongoing research and good science. It is maddening to see a so-called consensus and the declaration the debate is over.
This article is entitled "The Politics of Global Warming". In my opinion, this has turned into a political circus. And worse than that ... the far left has adopted climate as a religion, and a way to achieve far left goals such as government control of all energy use and consumption, not to mention individual choices about lifestyle.
Mr. Ball (as well as significant others) believes global warming began around 1680, at the end of the Little Ice Age. Here is a snipet:
This article is entitled "The Politics of Global Warming". In my opinion, this has turned into a political circus. And worse than that ... the far left has adopted climate as a religion, and a way to achieve far left goals such as government control of all energy use and consumption, not to mention individual choices about lifestyle.
Mr. Ball (as well as significant others) believes global warming began around 1680, at the end of the Little Ice Age. Here is a snipet:
Q: Is the globe warming and what is the cause?
A: Yeah, the world has been warming since 1680 and the cause is changes in the sun. But in their computer models they hardly talk about the sun at all and in the IPCC summary for policy-makers they don’t talk about the sun at all. And of course, if they put the sun into their formula in their computer models, it swamps out the human portion of CO2, so they can’t possibly do that.
Please read the interview at:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/mostread/s_492572.htmlCATASTROPHE, CRISIS COMING: GLOBAL COOLING CONSENSUS
I can't resist. Back in the chilly 1970's, there was a scientific consensus regarding imminent climate change. And it was happening while we were living it.
I borrow quotes from another blog. Watch out, the glaciers are coming. No deniers will be tolerated. We must act now or we are doomed. If the honorable president was around then, would he have advocated persistent burning of coal to heat up the atmosphere? What business would climate clown Al Gore have started instead of trying to make billions trading carbon credits?
Science magazine (Dec. 10, 1976) warned of "extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation." Science Digest (February 1973) reported that "the world's climatologists are agreed" that we must "prepare for the next ice age." The Christian Science Monitor ("Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster Than Even Experts Expect," Aug. 27, 1974) reported that glaciers "have begun to advance," "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter" and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool." Newsweek agreed ("The Cooling World," April 28, 1975) that meteorologists "are almost unanimous" that catastrophic famines might result from the global cooling that the New York Times (Sept. 14, 1975) said "may mark the return to another ice age." The Times (May 21, 1975) also said "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable" now that it is "well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950."
Just like political history, we need to be aware of science history. The next time you grouse about the weather forecast for tomorrow being wrong, rest assured that climate forecasts 100 years out are correct. Trust them ... come on, they know.
I borrow quotes from another blog. Watch out, the glaciers are coming. No deniers will be tolerated. We must act now or we are doomed. If the honorable president was around then, would he have advocated persistent burning of coal to heat up the atmosphere? What business would climate clown Al Gore have started instead of trying to make billions trading carbon credits?
Science magazine (Dec. 10, 1976) warned of "extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation." Science Digest (February 1973) reported that "the world's climatologists are agreed" that we must "prepare for the next ice age." The Christian Science Monitor ("Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster Than Even Experts Expect," Aug. 27, 1974) reported that glaciers "have begun to advance," "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter" and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool." Newsweek agreed ("The Cooling World," April 28, 1975) that meteorologists "are almost unanimous" that catastrophic famines might result from the global cooling that the New York Times (Sept. 14, 1975) said "may mark the return to another ice age." The Times (May 21, 1975) also said "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable" now that it is "well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950."
Just like political history, we need to be aware of science history. The next time you grouse about the weather forecast for tomorrow being wrong, rest assured that climate forecasts 100 years out are correct. Trust them ... come on, they know.
Friday, September 4, 2009
It's CRAP To You
As a person educated in graduate school in Climatology and working for one of the premier climatologists in the world, I offer this blog, with a long name of Climate Research and Prediction, but you can call it CRAP in deference to marxists, socialists, feel good progressives, and other misguided persons that have taken over the climate deception field.
I don't know how far I will get in exposing frauds like van jones, george monbiot (he wants the UK to fall further economically and into the grips of socialism ... see his "bestselling" books (according to him "The Age of Consent: A Manifesto for a New World Order and Captive State: The Corporate Takeover of Britain
He needs a new world order name of Moonbeam(didn't Germany in the 1930's and 40's strive for a new world order ... anyone care to remember history?) In the new world order (chief participant in the USA is BHO), perhaps only one name should be used ... there is no need to acknowledge our past relation to kapitalist killers.
Thanks for looking. I will be back.
I don't know how far I will get in exposing frauds like van jones, george monbiot (he wants the UK to fall further economically and into the grips of socialism ... see his "bestselling" books (according to him "The Age of Consent: A Manifesto for a New World Order and Captive State: The Corporate Takeover of Britain
He needs a new world order name of Moonbeam(didn't Germany in the 1930's and 40's strive for a new world order ... anyone care to remember history?) In the new world order (chief participant in the USA is BHO), perhaps only one name should be used ... there is no need to acknowledge our past relation to kapitalist killers.
Thanks for looking. I will be back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)