2. Liberals believe that their devotion to junk science trumps honest, heartfelt belief in a power greater than Mankind.

3. Liberals believe that they can read whatever they want into whatever they read. For instance, Jefferson did not tell the Danbury Baptists that there should be a wall between church and state. What he did say was, " Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." Jefferson was referring to government regulating religion and sought to prevent that and to ensure that the Danbury Baptists, and all other religions, could practice their faith freely without government interference. Unfortunately for Jefferson, liberals in government rarely miss an opportunity to regulate and restrict the free expression of religion that Jefferson, a Deist and worshipper of God, sought to protect.

4. Liberals will protect the rights of adult humans that rape, murder and molest children but have no problem with would-be humans getting thrown in the trash after getting their brains sucked out of their tiny innocent skulls.

5. Liberals believe it is their right to give away the earnings of others for things only the liberal, and the recipient, think is important.

6. Liberals believe that they and only they are smart enough to tell you how to live your life.

7. Liberals believe that a gas that represents only .03% of the atmosphere is responsible for every climatic event of the last 30 years.

8. Liberals believe that devastating the environment or poisoning children is okay so long as we stop adding that gas that represents only .03% of the atmosphere.

9. Liberals believe that they can say anything that is racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, or misogynistic against Conservatives because they believe that Conservatives are racists, bigots, sexists, and homophobes.

10. Liberals believe that the American people are the stupidest, most gullible people in the world. They have to believe this because after all, the American people keep voting for them, don’t they?

11. Liberals believe that America and its policies around the world are the reason that Muslims want to destroy us.

12. Liberals believe that illegal aliens and terrorists have the same rights that are guaranteed to native-born and naturalized American citizens... actually the illegals and terrorists have more rights.

13. Liberals believe that a president, who holds a nuclear physics degree and served in the military, and yet haplessly and incompetently allowed American citizens to languish in captivity on American soil in a foreign land for 444 days and who meets with terrorists hell bent on the massacre of millions is a better president than a man that used to be a actor and a governor who successfully ended the 70 year reign of an evil dictatorship and restored the pride and prestige in America damaged by the former president.

14. Liberals believe that all Americans are adulterers and that they lie about it.

15. Liberals believe that the 4,000 Americans that have died in a supposedly illegal war started by Republicans is a greater tragedy than the 53,000 that died in a known illegal war started by Democrats.

16. Liberals believe that anyone can raise a child well and that any combination of men and women can do just as good a job as the one man/one woman combination that has served humanity well for over 30,000 years.

17. Liberals believe in the existence of victimless crimes...until one of their loved ones is killed in a car crash by a drunk, heroin-addicted prostitute.

18. Liberals believe that you can rehabilitate child molesters and rapists.

19. Liberals believe that the military is full of thugs that deny people their rights and wage war all over the world while they shout down speakers, riot, and burn cars and destroy recruiting stations and deny recruiters access to merely talk to adults as guaranteed by law.

20. Liberals believe that high gas prices are Bush's fault and bemoan tanker oil spills but deny oil companies the ability to drill for oil in North America and refuse to build a single new oil refinery in 50 years. All of which would lower gas prices.

21. Liberals believe that they are, just by being Liberal, the smartest people...ever. Which is why they bring actors up to Capitol Hill to testify as "experts".

22. Liberals believe that anyone from anywhere in the world should have the right to come to America, while they, the liberals, live in gated communities.

23. Liberals believe that the government does everything better than businesses do. To that end, Liberals believe that Big Government has no culpability in the high price of gasoline, food, medicine and pharcuticals, yet Big Oil, Big Ag, Big HMO and Big Pharma do.

26. Liberals believe that there is nothing special about America or being an American and that it is uncool to be a "patriotic American".

27. Liberals believe that the tiny countries of Europe have the answers to how a country the size and population of the United States should do things.

28. Liberals believe that they are being patriotic when they travel abroad and then bad-mouth their American president during speeches for money.

30. Liberals believe that the failed teachings of Karl Marx, if done their way, will save the world.

Read the responses to the "Global Warming is a Hoax" post and you will see that our good friend, Rob in Los Osos, CA, is undeterred in my efforts in trying to talk him out of the global warming hoax.  This is sad, since all of his answers to my questions use the same faulty logic, circular logic and bogus science that the whole global warming hoax is built on.  He wants me to join the consensus of "scientists" that global warming is real.  I won't do that.  If you read the literature that they spew forth from the cramped little cubicles on college campi, most are not even atmospheric scientists.  Many are biologists, geologists, economists, communists, and other -ists with college degrees.  Well, just so you know, I have a college degree (in business from the University of Kansas "Rock, Chalk, Jayhawks!!!) and therefore I am just as qualified as any of these other college graduates to speak out on global warming.  Just because I don't agree with the "consensus" of other college graduates, does not make me wrong or these "scientists" right.  It is a theory, nothing more. Science is built on theory not fact.  The Big Bang is a theory, even though there is a lot of evidence supporting that theory.  Relativity, despite being thought up by one of the smartest humans to ever walk the earth, is still just a theory.  Global Warming is still, despite all of the hysteria, all of the scientific 'consensus', all of the media hype, just a theory, made by scientists that make their living off of the propagation of this theory as a source of hysteria.  

Fact is that there is no hard science supporting the hoax of global warming, just a lot of observations, hypothesis and conjecture, even among those that are in agreement about the 'consensus'.  It is faulty models created by eco-communists posing as scientists that wish to prove their belief that global warming exists.  Rob accuses me of using anecdotal evidence and not science.  Well, these so-called scientists use anecdotal evidence that there is global warming.  Rob claims different glaciers that are melting. So what?!?! Glaciers are made of ice.  That ice used to encompass the entire northern hemisphere. When they melted several thousand years ago, Rob was no where to be found bitching about global warming then. 

He says that minute amounts of increase in CO2 are enough to throw the entire earth's ecosystem off kilter.  What arrogant, self-absorbed nonsense!!! We have exploded atoms that only naturally get exploded in stars ON THE EARTH and we did not alter the earth's eco-system. But a few thousand cars driving around and a few billion incandescent light bulbs and we're all going to die!! He said that water vapor (for all you elementary school drop-outs like Rob- that means CLOUDS) is the PRIMARY greenhouse gas (his words) then Rob must be anti-clouds as much as he is anti-capitalism and must want to fight those b@stard clouds and all their water vapor.  Rob said that humans produce 20-30% of all of the 550 billion metric tons of carbon.  That means that b!tch Mother Nature is producing the other 70 to 80% of the CO2.  Why doesn’t he pester her with his nonsense that she is the one producing 3/4s of the earth’s greenhouse gases.  Sadly, he obviously doesn’t know how convection and the precipitation cycles work over the earth or else he wouldn't have answered the rainfall question the way he did.  All I heard in his response was "blah blah blah blah eco-communist propaganda blah blah blah."  Do a Google search on "arctic ice thickening" and read the results.  These guys say that yes, they say some thinning but no they don't know everywhere if there is no thickening.  Some said it started back in 1920; others say later. 

At the link: http://www.planetwater.ca/research/sea-ice.htm, they ask the straight-forward question: is the arctic ice thinning? 

Their answer? Sort of, but not at the rates previously thought.  Some reports had ice thinning at a rate of 40%.  This report says it was much less; only about 12% and only 3% is due to any warming.

They confidently conclude (from the website):

"We feel confident to say

• Overall thinning of Arctic ice was much less than reported 40%.
• The difference from submarine survey results was due to changes in wind patterns, moving ice from the central Arctic and primarily into the Canadian coastal region.
• Changes due directly to warming (less freezing, more melting) played very minor roles."

These people blow a Mars size hole in the global warming mythos by stating :1) it is built on computer models, 2) arctic ice melting is founded on anecdotal evidence, 3) it isn't as bad as reported, 4) not because of global warming.

Read JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 109, F04007, doi:10.1029/2003JF000045, 2004 found at http//www.nasa.gov/pdf/121645main_2003JF000045-1_pub_1.pdf  says about Canadian ice levels:

"Our measurements reveal thinning at lower elevations (below 1600 m) on most of the ice caps and glaciers but either very little change or thickening at higher elevations in the ice cap accumulation zones."  

That is NASA saying this, supposedly full of scientists that Rob likes so much. 

Bottom line for Rob, and anyone that supports the eco-communist party line, is this:  I will not accept your reality that you are trying to foist on the American people.  You want us to all agree with you and the eco-communists that global warming is real so we will cede our rights as Americans to global treaties like Kyoto, that will devastate the American economy and imprison America as a second-class world power, all the while allowing the communist sonsab!tches in China to do whatever they want wherever they want to whomever they want because they aren't stupid enough to fall for this eco-communist claptrap and pseudo-science.  Americans are plenty stupid to fall for this eco-communist claptrap and pseudo-science.  Don't misunderstand: I am all for a clean environment.  However, treaties like Kyoto, the bogus "America's Climate Security Act of 2007", replacing my perfectly fine incandescent light bulbs with poisonous CFLs, driving an ecology destroying Toyota Prius over my non-polluting Toyota Tundra, are not the answer to any of our environmental problems, real or perceived, and will do what ever idea borne of Liberalism and Command economic ideas will do: make things 10 times worse.  

The answer to all of our problems is found in: 1) human freedom, and 2) responsible capitalism.  Those two items, done in concert, are responsible for everything good in the world today.  Freedom and capitalism ended the Cold War, defeated Nazi Germany, put a man on the moon and made America the pre-eminent power in the world.  Left to freedom and capitalism, there would be an answer found to CO2 emissions, if it were responsible for perceived rises in temperature. Why do businesses spend money on GCC research?  Because there might be a dollar in it somewhere for them.    The free flow of capitalism provides the drive behind researching new technologies.  Freedom to research, freedom to buy what we want, and freedom to do as we deem necessary to take care of our families has provided this long standing string of prosperous quarters that has been going on since 1980 and the election of Ronald Reagan.  The government commanded answers like ethanol subsides is what is causing the food shortages around the world.  Command economies are what the Communist governments in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union had before we destroyed them with our freedom and capitalism.  We don't want to be like the failures of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact nations, yet our eco-communist activists and so-called leaders in Congress want us to adopt the practices of failures. 

What we need to do is stop this insane ethanol subsidy that the U.N. food program chief has called "a crime against humanity". The Prime Minister of Britain is considering halting the importation of American ethanol because of perceived backlash from the U.S. causing hunger and starvation around the world.  Stop plowing under grain crops to produce more corn for more ethanol plants.  Stop foisting E85 as an answer when E85 produces less MPG than 100% gasoline, takes as much energy to produce as it contains and is causing people around the world to starve. Stop encouraging Americans to buy dangerous and toxic products like compact florescent light bulbs that contain deadly mercury or ecologically devastating products like hybrid cars, whose nickel batteries have caused ecological wastelands in Canada.  Instead, let's invest in good research into better technologies that will not devastate the ecology we are trying to save.  Fuel cells, tidal power, geothermal, more efficient solar collectors, etc.  While we do that, we need to end the practice of oil importation from outside the Western Hemisphere, which damages the environment with every spill, by exploring and drilling in ANWAR and off the coast of California, in the lower 48 states and in the Gulf of Mexico. We need to start construction TODAY of 10 nuclear power plants and invest in the electrical infrastructure that is woefully inadequate of a nation as prosperous today.  We need to start construction TODAY of five new oil refineries to end the importation of gasoline that has caused the prices of gas to skyrocket at the pumps.  And, finally, we need to tell the eco-communists of the world to SHUT THE HELL UP and get out of the way of freedom and capitalism, because that will solve their problems if they just give it a chance to work.

I thank you.

Global warming is a hoax.

I can't express that sentiment any more plainly.

The global warming doomsday cultists, referred on this blog by the acronym as GWDCs, have produced anecdotal and observational "evidence" that the earth is warming beyond normal levels and this is causing all sorts of calamities such as polar ice melting, higher temperatures, and increased storm activity.  Actually, everything has been associated with global warming.  Record cold winters has been associated with global warming through some sort of mental jujitsu that I can't explain.

So, according to the GWDC what is causing all this warming?  The leftist and eco-communists (an eco-communist is any person or group of persons that wish to destroy the capitalist foundations of America to further their power play in the name of saving the earth) want the American people to believe that we are destroying the planet with, of all things, our breath.  Your CO2 exhalations are about to become a regulated pollutant, regardless if you had garlic and onions or not.  Carbon dioxide is found everywhere on the planet and all animals exhale the gas.  So what makes scientists think that carbon dioxide is the reason behind this perceived warming?   There is this phenomenon where the infrared radiation from the Sun is reflected back up from the surface, but the radiation is trapped from release back into space by water vapor and so-called 'greenhouse gases' like... drum roll please... carbon dioxide. So how much carbon dioxide are we talking about here that is supposedly trapping all this heat? 

To provide perspective on the question of carbon dioxide, let's first look at the Earth's atmosphere as a whole.  The earth's atmosphere is 4 quadrillion metric tons large.  Of that 4 quadrillion metric tons, here is the breakdown of elements that makes up "the air" (rounded to nearest hundredth of a percent): 

Nitrogen: 78.10%

Oxygen:   20.95%

Argon:     0.93%

Carbon Dioxide:  .03%

So carbon dioxide only makes up 3 hundredths of a percent of the atmosphere.  98% of the atmosphere is life giving oxygen and nitrogen.  Currently, industries, automobiles, people and animals are producing roughly 25 billion tons of CO2 was produced in America.  The truth is that it will take 400 million years to double the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at current rates of CO2 production. So where's the harm?

Based on this information here are some questions you should ask any of the GWDC.  Be sure to notice the song-and-dance routine that accompanies any discussion of these questions.

1. Since carbon dioxide makes up less only .03% of the atmosphere, what is it about CO2 that this little amount can change the entire environment the way you describe?

2. Since plants inhale CO2 as part of photosynthesis, exactly how much CO2 is pulled out of the atmosphere per tree?  Does that amount change by species?

3. How many trees are on the planet?  

4. Do grasses, shrubs, bushes, weeds, etc pull CO2 out of the atmosphere?  (of course they do) By how much? 

5. If it will take 400 million years to double the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, is the earth's ecosystem so fragile that the current rates of CO2 production will change the environment enough to cause noticeable, scientifically provable damage?

6.  Rainfall cools the earth.  How much rainfall fell on earth as an aggregate last year? Last month? Yesterday?

7.  Since you don't know exactly how much rainfall fell to cool the earth at any given moment, how can computer models properly capture the cooling effects of rain?

8. Aren't you all just full of crap and just want to take control of the wealth of the world on the premise of saving it?

Okay that last one will elicit a hostile response, but it was designed to.

The fact is that greenhouse theory is a crock. Sure, there is global warming.  It happens every year and is called "Spring".  Over the last 4 THOUSAND years, the earth has warmed a total of 3 degrees Celsius. This is according to the same ice cores that scientists have pulled from ice all over the world. Humanity is not affecting earth temperatures with CO2. Automobiles produced after 1990 (as a benchmark) produce almost no noticeable pollutants. The earth's temperature supposedly has raised one whole degree in the last 100 years, and yet the earth's temperature has remained unchanged for almost all of the last 50 years despite the huge increase in cars, airplanes and factories.  John Stossel has done a great job of pointing all this out in his book "Myth, Lies and Downright Stupidity". I agree with him wholeheartedly.

The government has spent $35 billion dollars, according to Mr. Stossel, on global warming research.  Private businesses have spent nearly as much.  I imagine that over 100 billion dollars have been spent on global warming projects.  There are whole new sectors of the economy that are springing up to meet the needs of GWDC acolytes. No global warming; no profit motive.

So what rationale do the GWDC use to keep up the fires of hysteria: the threat of global warming.  They say, "Yes Rich, there are a lot of holes in our theory, but what if we're right? Aren’t the dangers enough to necessitate action?  Here is something the GWDC should consider: It is a fact that a large extraterrestrial body has struck the earth in the past.  Look at Winslow, Arizona.  Look at the Tunguska, Siberia.  Look at the Yucatan peninsula.  The Yucatan asteroid strike is believed to be the one that destroyed the dinosaurs from the face of the earth.  So we have evidence that asteroids and meteors can and will strike the earth, as they do every day.  Yet there is no government program out there to stop such a strike from happening in the future.  Since we know that it will take 400 million years to double the amount of CO2 but there have been dozens of significant asteroid strikes in less time, I say we should stop wasting money on global warming and spend that money on detecting, intercepting and preventing a large asteroid or meteor from striking the earth.  The dangers are more real and will definitely end all life on earth, whereas global warming is unproven.  Would that be a better use for our time and money? Just as improbably as global warming, yet more real and tangible a threat. Isn't it? 

Addendum:

Let's talk about the Global Warming Doomsday Cult for a second.  As pointed out in a previous post, the GWDC needs pain and suffering to be visited on you for your sins committed against the earth. The GWDC strives to reduce the number of humans on the planet in order to "bring balance back" and enable humanity and nature to once again live in harmony.  How do I know they wish people dead?  First off, many members of the GWDC have had themselves sterilized to prevent any more "polluters" from being born.  Secondly, and most importantly, the eco-freaks out there believe that the last time Mankind and Nature were in balance was the time between the mid 1700's and mid 1800's. At that time, there were slightly less than 1 billion people on the planet; now there is 5 times that.  The GWDC would be quite happy if 5 billion people disappeared off the planet.  They would welcome the biblical "rapture" as an answer to their prayers not the harbinger of doom the Bible speaks of. 

If in fact the GWDC and eco-communists are successful in having CO2 listed as a pollutant, as there is an order from the Supreme Court to the EPA to study doing just that (actually the EPA says they can do it under the Clean Air Act already), then every human being in the country is a polluter in the eyes of the law. Wouldn't the first breath a newborn baby makes moments outside the womb be nothing short of "original sin" in the eyes of the eco-communists and GWDC members?  Imagine that: the third thing your son or daughter did in their life was pollute the environment according to these extreme religious fundamentalist. Least we forget, the GWDC has an armed wing that wages a war of terrorism on capitalist America.  The Earth Liberation Front has set dozens and dozens of fires all over America in an effort to roll back the spread of humanity from the fringes of wilderness areas.  They have started several large forest fires in their zealotry to protect the environment.  People have been killed and injured while fighting fires that ELF has started.  The most notorious of the fires was the Vail, Colorado housing project that ELF torched.  Millions of dollars of investors' money went up in smoke.  That is of no consequence to ELF as they fight evil human developers.  So what that thousands of acres of woodlands, some precious old growth trees, get torched so long as humanity is prevented from reaching these areas.  Like Sein Fein was to the Irish Republican Army, the GWDC has plenty of supporters in the political class of America.  Some are actively seeking to further the efforts of the GWDC, like Robert Kennedy Jr., and almost every Democrats in both houses of Congress.  Others are just useful idiots thinking they are doing good works like presidential hopeful, John McCain.

1. The Global Warming Doomsday Cultists and the Eco-communists and their useful idiots who unknowingly support them

2. The Islamo-fascists... in that order.

One of the things I think is missed by everyone is the fact that the CFLs do not reduce demand or the amount of power generated. The misconception put forth by liberal Global Warming Doomsday Cultists is that if we replace every incandescent bulb with a CFL we will reduce the need for electricity because the bulbs are more efficient. That logic is completely backwards. A power plant produces power, period. It does not produce power based on the demands of the consumer. If it did, we would not experience brown outs during the summer. If CFLs, due to their efficiencies, created an unused surplus of electricity, the power plants would not produce less power to eliminate the surplus. The power companies would just sell that excess power to other markets in the electrical grid to offset inefficiencies in production or usage elsewhere. My point is that the CFL is completely useless in reducing in any real way, shape, matter or form the perceived damage of the incandescent bulb because the power plants producing the power are still running at the same rates and burning the coal to produce the electricity. The push for CFLs is exactly the same demand side mentality that the liberals use for their demand side tax policy. If liberal eco-warriors attacked the GCC issue from a supply side, we would have ten new nuclear power plants being built a year and coal-fired plants would be phased out. Instead we are treated to a liberal "solution" that is in the end much worse than the original problem, which is another hallmark of liberal "solutions" to problems.