Shire Network News #176 has been released. The feature interview is with Pastor Ameal Haddad of Ambassadors For Peace. His idea is that people around the world should have religious freedom. I know, crazy, right? Maybe it’s so crazy it might just work through. Click here for the show notes, links, and ways to listen to the show; directly from the web site, by downloading the mp3 file, or by subscribing with your podcatcher of choice.

Below is the text of my commentary.

Hi, this is Doug Payton for Shire Network News with a year-end edition of "Consider This!"

In January of this year, SNN contributors Meryl Yourish and I did a bit of prognostication about 2009, in which we spoke as though it were December.  Well, here we are in December and I’d like to take a look back at my predictions and find out how much of a satirical seer I was.

President Obama, while not having actually had any law enacted or treaty signed regarding global warming, managed to make this year cooler than last year.  Must have been sheer force of will.

Sure enough, some cold temperatures records were set in both Europe and America.  Indeed, it appears that, against all models, warming has stopped, and the "ClimateGate" scandal featured the head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Kevin Trenberth, proclaiming that it’s a "travesty" that they can’t "account for the lack of warming at the moment".  Clearly, due to President Obama’s force of will.

My second prediction was a bit tongue-in-cheek.  Well, OK, they all were, but this predicted the creation of an Iraqi Olympic Shoe-Throwing Team.  While the team has yet to materialize, the Iraqi reporter that threw a shoe at President Bush was the target of someone apparently trying out for the team.  An exiled reporter, supportive of US policy in Iraq, decided to make his mark.  The IOC, however, judged that the throw was disqualified because it hit a wall, making proper distance measuring impossible, and because proper safety measure were not taken.

My third prediction was simply:

The world now loves us:  They really love us, ever since we elected a Democrat.  Iraq even allows US troops to be stationed there, thanks to the splendid outcome of "Obama’s Terrorist Intervention" in that country, which began on January 20th of this year.

Sure enough, the nations of the world have been saying such nice things about us this past year.  Well, except that they haven’t actually done anything differently.  And except for Poland who we left out of a missile shield system.  And, of course, except for everyone who hated us before; they still hate us now.  But other than that, the world loves us!

And finally…

Universal Agreement:  Both sides of the political aisle have finally come together to speak with one voice.  No longer is there any disagreement, harsh criticism or mean-spirited arguing.  The recently-passed bill, entitled "The Pelosi/Reid Equal Opportunity in Talk Radio and Radical Right-Wing Internet Commentary Act" (otherwise known as the PREOITRARRWICA), has gone a long way to make sure that the voice of the people is heard loud and clear.

No return of the Fairness Doctrine yet, but the government may yet interfere with radio station management in order to get the Fairness Doctrine in effect, if not in actual law. So, I guess I got this one wrong.  But now you see why I had to take such a happy tone in this alternate timeline; it’s not just a good idea, it was the law.

So overall, except for perhaps the first 20 days, this year has shown us that America’s best days are ahead of her, if we can just pass that new $2.5 trillion spending bill.  And I’m sure we will.

Hey, with TARP, bailouts, and a potential budget-busting health care bill, my numbers weren’t that far off.  Liberals are nothing if not predictable.  No Jean Dixon necessary.  Merry Christmas, and consider this.

Do you want to know the real reason behind all the meeting and agreements and doomsaying being done at the Copenhagen climate change confab?  Listen to the applause.

First, the warm-up act, so to speak, with hints of what was to come.

But before [Australian climate change minister Penny Wong] rose to speak the conference proceedings were interrupted by people with whistles and sirens chanting “stop green capitalism” – a sign of the anger in the developing world that the Danish host government is trying to wrest the process from the professional negotiators, who have failed to make any progress, and hand it to politicians, who might have some chance of achieving something before we all leave on Saturday.

And then the headlining act hit the stage.

Then President Chavez brought the house down.

When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause.

When he said there was a “silent and terrible ghost in the room” and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.

But then he wound up to his grand conclusion – 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ – “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell….let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.”  He won a standing ovation.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is the primary purpose of the Copenhagen conference and those like it.  It’s the elites getting together to bring capitalism down and raise socialism up so that they can exert more power.  It’s a power grab, plain and simple and unashamed. 

You may have your reasons for wanting to see less carbon in the air, but those in politics and government clearly have their own agenda.  Is it yours?

No, I’m not going to list all 100 reasons in the Daily Express column, but I do want to hit some highlights.  (And no, all these reasons are, in and of themselves, reasons specifically why climate change is natural.  Some do, but most of them have to do with enumerating why it’s not man-made, and others are political/scientific reasons why we should not spend billions or trillions on fixing a problem that may not be a problem.)

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

11) Politicians and activiists (sic) claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles

33) Today’s CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared to most of the earth’s history – we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere

38) The world “warmed” by 0.07 +/- 0.07 degrees C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 degrees C expected by the IPCC

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical

52) Global temperatures are below the low end of IPCC predictions not at “at the top end of IPCC estimates”

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the “hockey stick graph” which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

76) Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.

78) A proper analysis of ice core records from the past 650,000 years demonstrates that temperature increases have come before, and not resulted from, increases in CO2 by hundreds of years.

91) The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.

I’ve saved a boatload of links about the whole Climate Research Unit e-mail and document leak, but today I came across an article by the aptly-named author Christopher Booker that distills the issue down to 3 salient points.

There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious, as lucidly put together by Willis Eschenbach (see McIntyre’s blog Climate Audit and Anthony Watt’s blog Watts Up With That ), is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.

They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.

Read the rest of this entry

And it ain’t a happy day for the CRU.  True, this is a cybercrime, and the perpetrator(s) should be brought to justice.  But equally as big is the contents of the >1000 e-mails and >3800 documents.

The Hadley Climate Research Unit has confirmed the hack, so this is not a hoax, and global-warming-skeptic sites like “Watts Up With That” and Andrew Bolt of Australia’s Herald-Sun newspaper are sifting through the data, finding some rather compromising evidence.  Some include details on how temperature data was manipulated, to frustration that the climate models didn’t predict the current global temp decline, to attempts to obfuscate data released via a Freedom of Information request.  Bolt has been updating his post frequently and has a dozen examples so far.

As the Wall St. Journal says, “Well, this should get interesting.”

True, this could all be a major hoax, but with Hadley confirming the breach, and with 61 megabytes of data having been dumped (i.e. a vast amount), this is sounding very real.  Stay tuned.

No, not as in golfing.  I’m going to be quite busy this week, so blog posts this week will consist mostly of a collection of links that I happen across.

John Mark Reynolds, writing at the Evangel blog, wonders about that prediction that Christians would become a fringe political force if they stuck with their position on same-sex marriage.  This after Maine, of all places, upheld traditional marriage.  Not mentioned is that the House of Representatives barely squeaked out a health care bill (passing it with only 2 votes to spare) only after a provision was added that prevented abortion from being covered by it.  Wasn’t that supposed to be a losing issue, too?

October, 2009 was the 3rd coldest October recorded in the US.  Can we officially chuck those computer climate models and just admit we don’t really know what’s going on with climate, and thus should refrain from making pronouncements on what is or isn’t changing it?

Racist graffiti, and Al Sharpton isn’t all over CNN denouncing it?  Oh, wait, it’s anti-white graffiti.  Well then, nothing to see here.

Attorney General Eric Holder is endorsing extending provisions of the Patriot Act including roving wiretaps.  It’s one thing to talk it down when you’re not in the hot seat.  It’s another thing entirely when it’s your responsibility, eh?

The European Union, as a whole, could sink underneath the waves of debt very soon, having total debt equaling 100% of its annual gross domestic product.  A special commission "discovered" that a major reason is the socialist pensions and healthcare that the government guarantees.  And we want to follow them into this whirlpool?

And finally, the legacy of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, and a musing about whether or not political correctness will allow a candid and honest public discussion, or if more people will die at the PC altar.

So asks the BBC:

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

The article continues on, referring to to Sun output and ocean cycles, and how the climate models didn’t predict this, even though the guys who program the models say they took all this into consideration.

My point is not to debate what is or isn’t heating or cooling the planet, but rather to point out that there is so much that governments around the world want to legislate based on these climate models, while these models are failing in their near-term predictions.  But that doesn’t stop Al Gore from his itinerant preaching, nor the climate scientists from insisting that, never mind the past decade, now it’s going to get warmer, nor governments from trying to save us with new taxes based on models that aren’t predicting properly.

No, instead we’re pushing all our chips in based on buggy climate software. 

Eric Scheie at "Classical Values" points out that the word "deregulation" doesn’t mean what some users of it think it means.  After noting that some consider it an unmitigated evil, it seems that they are making it the scapegoat for many of our economic ills when in fact quite the opposite is true.

I’m no economist, but the problem is that deregulation is being seen in a vacuum, without reference to the bigger picture, and I think the bigger picture was influenced — possibly even dominated — by something worse than regulation.

I refer to the complete absence of any standards. Not long ago, Glenn Reynolds made a nostalgic reference to the stuffy uptightness of old-fashioned bankers:

You know, we may just find that all those "stuffy" and "uptight" traits that old-fashioned bankers used to be mocked for were actually a good thing. . . .

Truer words have never been spoken and I’ve blogged about this before. It used to be that you had to actually qualify for a loan. You had to demonstrate income, creditworthiness, equity in the home, that the downpayment wasn’t borrowed, etc. before the stuffy uptight pinstriped guys would even think about giving you a loan. It was good that they were uptight. The "system" (for lack of a better word) worked.

So, what made these stuffy uptight guys decide they could get away with ditching the old uptight unfair standards that said (among other things) that some people are more worthy of getting loans than others?

The answer, as most of us know, is the government. It wasn’t as if these guys just stripped off their pinstripes and dove into the economic orgy room; they did something that’s really perfectly in character for stuffy uptight guys — they did as they were told. And they were told not to ever under any circumstances do anything that might in any way be interpreted by anyone at ACORN to have so much as a smidgen of an appearance of anything resembling discrimination. (A word denoting pure, unmitigated evil.)

Bad as the loss of banking standards might be, it’s not what I think is the overarching problem.

In my view, the biggest the loss of standards came in the form of the all-encompassing government guarantee. It was a gigantic blank check, and it operated to cover all sins. That no bank could ever be allowed to fail, and every mortgage would be backed by big daddy at FANNIE and FREDDIE meant that there really was no downside to anything, whether deliberate irresponsibility or government-mandated irresponsibility. The taxpayers would be responsible.

This may be many things, and it may of course be profoundly immoral, but to call it "deregulation" or "an excess of the free market" is absurd.

This is the same thing as when Barney Frank blamed the housing crisis on a failure of the free market.  At the time, Republicans wanted to regulate more heavily Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; two entities that are themselves a demonstration of how non-free-market the mortgage industry is.  Democrats are blaming all the usual suspects and hoping their base isn’t paying attention.

Shire Network News #169 has been released. The feature interview is with Professor Ian Plimer, author of "Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science". Click here for the show notes, links, and ways to listen to the show; directly from the web site, by downloading the mp3 file, or by subscribing with your podcatcher of choice.

Below is the text of my commentary.

Hi, this is Doug Payton for Shire Network News, asking you to "Consider This!"

This is a tale of two countries.  Both have what they call "freedom of religion".  But one imprisons people for converting to a religion that is not the official one.  The other does not. 

Now tell me, which country would you believe if it told you something?  OK, one data point does not a trend make.  Fair enough, then, let’s continue.

Clearly, simply writing something down on paper does not necessarily mean that a country will abide by those things written.  Let’s take a look at a recent event by the country that has freedom of religion but doesn’t, and see the manner in which it practices it.

Two women were arrested on March 5th and later "convicted" of converting to … well, that would be telling, wouldn’t it?  Let’s just say, converting to "a non-approved religion", and we’ll let your imagination get to work.  Into the slammer with them.  [I’m sorry, but I know I’m going to mangle their names.]  Maryam Rustampoor, 27, and Marzieh Amirizadeh, 30, were tried on August 9th and told to recant their faith, which they did not.  Back to the slammer, this time with a death penalty on their heads for daring to practice "freedom" of religion.  Oh, and by the way; medical attention for these young ladies?  Not gonna’ happen.  Injury, meet insult.

The other country?  Well, let’s just say that nobody gets sent to prison for simply believing.  Sometimes doing based on believing can land you in hot water, but just believing?  Well, not even the guys at Gitmo, not even the ones who were shooting, and then released to shoot again, were incarcerated for believing.

Oops, I think I slipped up there a bit.  Well, just pretend I still have you pondering about that particular country, just for a bit.

Now, let me ask you; who comes to the defense of these poor women, still in the hoosegow, awaiting their sentence, for believing?  Not some astroturf organization trying to boost an overall image of their religion, but a group dealing specifically with Christian persecution worldwide.  The web page of International Christian Concern lists place after place where Christians are not the most welcome folks, and indeed this incident is currently mentioned on the front page.  They’re not drumming up feigned offense at perceived slights.  Bodies rotting in slums, rape, murder, physical assault; all for believing. 

The countries mentioned in the current articles on the front page include Somalia, India, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Burma, Iraq, and one of our mystery countries, Iran.  Are you catching a trend here?  Most of these are Islamic countries with the occasional Hindu and officially atheist country thrown in. 

But Iran gets the Oscar this week for Best Persecution in an Official Capacity for sentencing to death two young women for believing.  For them, there will be no Brian De Palma movie made.  (That broad brush is reserved for the military.)  The United Nations will not pass a resolution on their behalf.  (That remedy is reserved for when Israel so much as blinks.)  The media will not report on them.  (They have better things to do. Michelle Obama’s outfits must be investigated.)  No, Iran gets a pass because Iran knows the world, and so far, the world is ignoring these potential martyrs.

And by the way, these are martyrs; people who could die solely because of what they believe.  If you go on a shooting rampage and get killed in the process, or if you get captured and sent to the Guantanamo Hilton, with 3 squares a day and your every religious requirement fulfilled, buddy, you ain’t a martyr.  I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

And finally, the other mystery country is … well, it’s any of the many countries in this world that was founded on New Testament and/or Old Testament principles — that old-time Judeo-Christian ethic — in which Western civilization is steeped.  Now, none of them are perfect because, so far, they’ve been run by imperfect humans.  But people don’t get incarcerated simply for believing, no matter the religion they’re coming from or going to.  So if you think that one culture and its religious foundation is just as good as any other, and if you think that one country’s word is as good as the other, well then I think you need to take just a bit more time to Consider This.

A new peer-reviewed study claims that "[v]irtually all changes in global atmospheric temperatures in the late 20th century were the result of nature rather than human activity". 

Yeah, that "settled" science continues to get unsettled.

“It goes against the orthodoxy,” said climate scientist Chris de Freitas of New Zealand’s Auckland University. The new findings called into question the politically-correct, politically-motivated assumptions driving the climate change debate, he said.

De Freitas and Australian scientists John McLean and Bob Carter reported that at least 80 percent of climate variability tracked over the past half a century could be attributed to internal climate-system factors including the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Pacific warming phenomenon and its cooling twin, La Nina.

This left little room for human-caused factors like emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other so-called greenhouse gases. Intermittent volcanic activity, producing significant cooling, was found to have been a factor.

The paper was published Thursday, following a six-month peer review process, in the American Geophysical Union’s Journal of Geophysical Research.

All of our efforts trying to stem this may be for naught.