Today's "Damn that global 'warming'" update

From al-Reuters:

The 2007 hurricane season may be less severe than forecast due to cooler-than-expected water temperatures in the tropical Atlantic, private forecaster WSI Corp said on Tuesday.

The season will bring 14 named storms, of which six will become hurricanes and three will become major hurricanes, WSI said in its revised outlook. WSI had previously expected 15 named storms of which eight would become hurricanes and four would become major hurricanes.

"Because the ocean temperatures have not yet rebounded from the significant drop in late spring, we have decided to reduce our forecast numbers slightly," said Todd Crawford, a WSI seasonal forecaster.
...
Despite the downgraded forecast, WSI still expects the 2007 season to be more active than last year, and added that storm-weary parts of the Gulf Coast could still be hit.

"We feel the general threat to the western Gulf is reduced slightly, with a corresponding increase in the threat to the eastern Gulf and Florida," Crawford said.

Let's see: after a busy 2005 hurricane season (blamed by various nutbars, including the Goreacle, on global "warming"), we were told 2006 would be just as busy as 2005. We got nothing, especially here in Florida. Then we were told that 2007 would be busy, and now we're being told that due to (** snicker **) colder than expected temperatures, 2007 is being revised downward.

Three exit questions: (1) At what point can we stop referring to these people as "experts"? (2) How have these shysters managed to convince people to keep paying them for their chronically wrong forecasts? (3) Considering that this has been an unseasonably cool year (some might say it's a cool cycle?), can we please get off the Chicken Littleism that the treehuggers have been spewing our way?

British schools remove Churchill from history, add global "warming"

The wussification of the UK continues. From the Sun via Michelle Malkin:

FURY erupted last night after Sir Winston Churchill was axed from school history lessons.

Britain’s cigar-chomping World War Two PM — famed for his two-finger victory salute — was removed from a list of figures secondary school children must learn about.

Instead they will be taught about “relevant” issues such as global warming and drug dangers. Churchill’s grandson, Tory MP Nicholas Soames, branded the move “total madness.”

The decision to axe Churchill is part of a major shake-up aimed at dragging the national curriculum into the 21st century, it was claimed last night.

But the plan — hatched by advisers — angered schools secretary Ed Balls, who vowed to probe ALL the changes to the curriculum.

The proposals will see traditional timetables torn up, with pupils focusing on modern “relevant” topics such as drug and booze abuse, climate change and GM foods.

Churchill — voted the greatest ever Briton — goes off the required lessons list, along with Hitler, Gandhi, Stalin and Martin Luther King.

There will also be no need to mention the Wars of the Roses, Elizabeth I or Henry VIII.

Looks like the NEA here in America has gotten a hold of schools abroad, as well.

"Al Gore And NBC: Birds Of A Feather"

Abso-freakin'-lutely awesome piece from Investors Business Daily (via CNN):

Politics: Was what Al Gore called "the largest global entertainment event in all of human history" also the largest in-kind political contribution? And where's the Fairness Doctrine when you need it?

Considering that here in the U.S. the Peacock Network's three-hour Gore infomercial on global warming lost out in the ratings to "Cops" and "America's Funniest Home Videos," Gore's claim may be open to question. Live Earth, in fact, may have been America's funniest home video. Ever. (Ouch! - Ed.)

But thanks in large part to the 75 hours of free airtime that NBC gave Gore on its various stations, starting with NBC and including CNBC, Bravo, the Sundance channel, Universal HD and Telemundo, Gore may now be the 800-pound gorilla this political season.

Gore insists he's not running for president. Yet, as we have wondered before, why would a man who insists that global warming is the biggest threat to mankind, bigger than nuclear terror, not want control of the reins of a major world polluter and chief resister to Kyoto?

Dan Harrison, an NBC corporate senior vice president, called the Gore effort "an initiative we believe in" -- the "we" presumably including corporate parent General Electric. (NYSE:GE) Yet he insisted: "I don't think climate change is a political issue."

From the other side of his mouth, Harrison opined: "If it's a political issue, it's whether the political will exists to address that change. We know we need to do something, and this is a way to heighten awareness."

So he considers it NBC's mission to generate that political will in an election cycle in support of a man who once ran for president.

NBC and GE have other interests in hyping climate change. Let's not forget GE is the parent of NBC and stands to make a wad of cash from selling alternative energy products from wind turbines to solar panels to those compact fluorescent bulbs containing mercury.

So when Gore prances on stage to demand we stop building coal-fired plants, that's music to GE's corporate ears.

NBC's Ann Curry certainly thinks global warming is a political issue. During prime-time coverage, she almost got down on her knees to beg the jolly green giant to run for the White House.

Interviewing Gore from the site of the concert in New Jersey, Curry gushed:

"A lot of people want me to ask you tonight if you're running for president. And I know what you're answer is gonna be, believe me. I gotta ask you though. After fueling this grass-roots movement, if you become convinced that without you there will not be the political will in the White House to fight global warming to the level that is required, because the clock is ticking, would you answer the call? Would you answer the call, yes or no?"

Certainly Gore thinks global warming is a political issue, appearing earlier this year before Democrat-controlled House and Senate committees pleading for action. During his opening statement before the House, he famously said: "The planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor."

After Gore's testimony, a better course of action would have been to ask for a second opinion.

When a conservative appears on talk radio, liberals cry for the Fairness Doctrine. Seventy-five free hours for Archbishop Gore's Church of Climate Change? Not a peep.

Nope...no liberal media bias!

RFK, Jr.: Politicians who don't buy global "warming" nonsense are "traitors"

RFK, Jr., presumably sober (though that's no guarantee) when he uttered this, adds "traitor" to Ellen Goodman's "Holocaust deniers" lexicon of labels for people who don't buy the junk science known as manmade global "warming". From Newsday:

However, Etheridge aside, it was nonmusicians at this concert who made the most passionate pleas about demanding action for the environment. "Get rid of all these rotten politicians that we have in Washington, who are nothing more than corporate toadies," said Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the environmentalist author, president of Waterkeeper Alliance and Robert F. Kennedy's son, who grew hoarse from shouting. "This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors."

There you have it, folks. Going overseas and poormouthing our leaders and our troops doesn't count as "treason". Attempting to undermine the troops' morale and mission while giving the Al Jazeera Terrorvision Network sound bites to use in their propaganda isn't "treason". But have any doubts that global "warming" is real or that it is manmade, and you're right up there with Benedict Arnold, pal!

Dipsh#t.

Fortunately, we have teachers trying to keep our kids off of the path to "treason"!

Hypocrisy, irony, or both?

You be the judge:

As Madonna bounds on to the huge Wembley stage to save the planet, how the assembled Greenies will cheer.

The superstar is today fronting the massive Live Earth event, with nine concerts played over 24 hours across seven continents before an audience of two billion.

The much-hyped bid to save the world is being masterminded by former U.S. vice president Al Gore - who helped focus attention on the environmental movement with his Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth - and features artists including The Police, Red Hot Chili Peppers, UB40 and Metallica.

No doubt to rapturous applause, Madonna will call for mass global change to reduce carbon emissions and to tackle 'climate crisis'.

Watching the veteran star lap up the adoration, her entourage could, however, be forgiven for exchanging slightly jaded glances - having witnessed her jet in for the concert from New York.

For her 2006 World Tour, she flew by private jet, transporting a team of up to 100 technicians and dancers around the globe. Waiting in the garage at home, she has a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, an Audi A8 and a Mini Cooper S.

Indeed, Madonna's carbon footprint is dwarfed only by her ego - she has vowed that she will 'speak to the planet' at Wembley. In fact, an apology might be in order - for the superstar's energy consumption is only the tip of the iceberg in this epic vanity-fest.

The Live Earth event is, in the words of one commentator: "a massive, hypocritical fraud".

For while the organisers' commitment to save the planet is genuine, the very process of putting on such a vast event, with more than 150 performers jetting around the world to appear in concerts from Tokyo to Hamburg, is surely an exercise in hypocrisy on a grand scale.

Matt Bellamy, front man of the rock band Muse, has dubbed it 'private jets for climate change'.

A Daily Mail investigation has revealed that far from saving the planet, the extravaganza will generate a huge fuel bill, acres of garbage, thousands of tonnes of carbon emissions, and a mileage total equal to the movement of an army.

The most conservative assessment of the flights being taken by its superstars is that they are flying an extraordinary 222,623.63 miles between them to get to the various concerts - nearly nine times the circumference of the world. The true environmental cost, as they transport their technicians, dancers and support staff, is likely to be far higher.

The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists' and spectators' travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specialises in such calculations.

Throw in the television audience and it comes to a staggering 74,500 tonnes. In comparison, the average Briton produces ten tonnes in a year.

The concert will also generate some 1,025 tonnes of waste at the concert stadiums - much of which will go directly into landfill sites.
...
Live Earth say that they will recycle much of the waste generated. Fine talk, but in fact some of the concert venues are struggling to keep up with their commitments.

A spokesman for Wembley says they only have the capacity to recycle around a third of waste produced - the rest will go into landfill sites.

Travel forms the vast majority of the 'carbon footprint' talked of by ecological campaigners - contributing up to 90 per cent of the environmental 'cost'.

Collins says: "It is patently absurd to claim that travel of this nature doesn't have an impact. Each person attending the event will have to make a return journey to the venue, be it by air, rail, bus or car. This burns fossil fuel - precisely what we are trying to reduce.

"There is also the environmental cost of these artists flying around the world - that is absolutely huge." ...

Once again, "do as I say, not as I do" and "good enough for me, but not for thee" rule the day for these jerks.

There's much more in the article, especially the indulgences scheme known as "carbon offsets" (like the ones Gore buys from himself). But I think you get the idea: normal people (i.e. us peons) with Hummers are bad while celebrities with multiple gas guzzler cars and jets are good. Got it?

Hope for Euros yet! Poll: Brits more worried about Fido's piles than global "warming"

From the Beeb:

The public believes the effects of global warming on the climate are not as bad as politicians and scientists claim, a poll has suggested.
The Ipsos Mori poll of 2,032 adults - interviewed between 14 and 20 June - found 56% believed scientists were still questioning climate change.

There was a feeling the problem was exaggerated to make money, it found.

The Royal Society said most climate scientists believed humans were having an "unprecedented" effect on climate.

The survey suggested that terrorism, graffiti, crime and dog mess were all of more concern than climate change.

Graffiti? Dog crap? Those things worry Brits more than does that piece of science fiction known as global "warming" (or "climate change", depending on the time of the year).

"Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny"

Another global "warming" skeptic, or as Ellen Goodman calls them, "Holocaust denier", in the Chicago Sun-Times:

In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical political posturing as the central focus of public discourse.

If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming.

A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open and honest regarding the science. Global warming threats ought to be studied and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated as a means of building support for a desired political position.

Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.

For example, Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, "Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame."

Gore claims the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine."

Gore claims global warming is causing more tornadoes. Yet the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated in February that there has been no scientific link established between global warming and tornadoes.

Gore claims global warming is causing more frequent and severe hurricanes. However, hurricane expert Chris Landsea published a study on May 1 documenting that hurricane activity is no higher now than in decades past. Hurricane expert William Gray reported just a few days earlier, on April 27, that the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. Atlantic coast has declined in the past 40 years. (If hurricanes have declinded in the last 40 years, and global "warming" has purportedly increased in the last 40 years, then how can the two be connected? - Ed.) Hurricane scientists reported in the April 18 Geophysical Research Letters that global warming enhances wind shear, which will prevent a significant increase in future hurricane activity.

Gore claims global warming is causing an expansion of African deserts. However, the Sept. 16, 2002, issue of New Scientist reports, "Africa's deserts are in 'spectacular' retreat . . . making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa."

Gore argues Greenland is in rapid meltdown, and that this threatens to raise sea levels by 20 feet. But according to a 2005 study in the Journal of Glaciology, "the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins and growing inland, with a small overall mass gain." In late 2006, researchers at the Danish Meteorological Institute reported that the past two decades were the coldest for Greenland since the 1910s.

Gore claims the Antarctic ice sheet is melting because of global warming. Yet the Jan. 14, 2002, issue of Nature magazine reported Antarctica as a whole has been dramatically cooling for decades. More recently, scientists reported in the September 2006 issue of the British journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series A: Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, that satellite measurements of the Antarctic ice sheet showed significant growth between 1992 and 2003. And the U.N. Climate Change panel reported in February 2007 that Antarctica is unlikely to lose any ice mass during the remainder of the century.

Each of these cases provides an opportunity for Gore to lead by example in his call for an end to the distortion of science. Will he rise to the occasion? Only time will tell.

Bad news for moonbats: Americans see terrorism as bigger threat than global "warming"

A little sanity out of the electorate is a good thing, don't you think? From Angus-Reid:

Many adults in the United States believe political violence is more menacing than climate change, according to a poll by Opinion Dynamics released by Fox News. 52 per cent of respondents think global terrorism poses a more serious threat to the world than global warming.
...
Polling Data

Over the coming decades, which do you think will pose a more serious threat to the world—the effects of climate change and global warming or the effects of global terrorism?

Effects of global terrorism: 52%

Effects of climate change and global warming: 28%

Equal effects: 15%

Don’t know: 4%

Source: Opinion Dynamics / Fox News
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 900 registered American voters, conducted on Jun. 5 and Jun. 6, 2007. Margin of error is 3 per cent.

Kofi's replacement finds root cause of Darfur genocide

What else? Global "warming"! From Texas Rainmaker:

Looks like the crisis in Darfur is just another catastrophe engineered by SUVs and incandescent lightbulbs.

THE slaughter in Darfur was triggered by global climate change and that more such conflicts may be on the horizon, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon says in an article published today.

Whatever you do, don’t blame it on the religion of peace, whose members have launched attacks on civilians and driven them into makeshift villages in the Saharan desert.

"Hey, Ibrahim, you hot? Me, too. Let's go kill thousands of people!"

Denver asking for "personal sacrifice" to fight global "warming"

From Denver:

Denver is gearing up to fight global warming, and residents may soon be asked to make personal sacrifices to help save the planet.
The new plan is aimed at making Denver a national leader in reducing gas emissions that have been linked to global warming, giving a major push to alternative energy, stepping up recycling and changing building codes to encourage energy conservation.

I wonder if said "sacrifice" to fighting global "warming" includes giving extra coats to the needy...because it's been freezing #ss cold in Denver! Details:

Residents of Colorado's Front Range awoke Friday morning to frost-covered windshields as temperatures dropped to the lowest readings in over 50 years.

Just one day later they were at local pools enjoying temperatures in the mid-80s.

The temperature at Denver International Airport fell to 31 degrees at 5:44 a.m. Friday, setting a new record low for the date.

The previous record for June 8 was 37 degrees, last set in 1974.

In addition to the new record low, the sub-freezing temperatures also became the latest freeze on record for the city of Denver and the second-coldest June temperature ever recorded.

The previous date of latest freeze on record was June 2, 1951.

Temperatures in Denver have only dropped below freezing two other times during the month of June; 32 degrees on June 1, 1919 and 30 degrees on June 2, 1951.

The data doesn't lie: 9 of the 12 warmest years in Denver occurred before 1955, which would be before the advent of SUV's and all of the other things that the enviro-Chicken Littles blame for man-made global "warming". But hey, if it makes Denver feel better to act like they're "doing something", then I say "Knock yourselves out."

Speaking of enviro-kooks, recall the the Kyoto Protocol (which our Senate rejected 95-0), which exempted countries like China and India from pollution standards that would be imposed on the U.S.? Considering that China is reportedly polluting 2/3 of their cities' air and water, it doesn't take a genius to see that the main motivation behind the global "warming" crowd who crafted Kyoto was to destroy the United States economy. Otherwise, why exempt the biggest polluters of the world?

Canuck MSM engages in "fauxtography"

As Moonbattery points out, the "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" news agency al-Reuters doesn't have a monopoly on using doctored photos to advance their left-wing agenda. The CBC in Canuckistan is getting in on the action, too.

The dhimmis at al-Reuters aren't the only ones who know how to doctor photographs to help them spin what they cavalierly refer to as "the news." Check out the picture Canada's CBC used to chastise Environment Minister John Baird for trying to protect his country's economy from the Kyoto farce (via Small Dead Animals):

Politics Watch reports:

The head of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation News faced questioning from Conservative MPs on Parliament Hill Tuesday about what they called a "doctored photo" that appeared in April on CBC's news website.

The public broadcaster's news web site carried an altered stock photo of the Toronto skyline that was noticeably darkened and made the smog and atmospheric haze appear much worse than in the original photo.

The altered picture of the skyline accompanied a story about the Kyoto accord and was first noticed by a Canadian conservative blogger.

Tony Burman, editor in chief of CBC News, must have struggled mightily to keep a straight face while insisting that the ham-handedly doctored photo was the result of a "process error" and not indicative of left-wing bias. Anyone naive enough to rely on the MSM for information might just believe him.

Nope...no liberal media bias!

Bush destroying Neptune

First Earth, then Mars...and now, Neptune! Bush's Rovian Atmospheric Terminator (BRAT) is working overtime to destroy the whole solar system! From Moonbattery:

The global warming crisis has now spread beyond Mars all the way to Neptune, the most distant planet in the solar system (Pluto doesn't count anymore).

Neptune has been growing brighter and hotter since 1980. Scientists have correlated Neptune's warming trend, Earth's warming trend, and solar output.

This can only mean that our selfish refusal to rescind the industrial revolution is heating up not only the Earth, but the rest of the solar system, including the Sun itself, thereby causing it to emit more energy.

The only solution is for the United Nations to take full control of the planet and ban all modern technology. The alternative is an apocalypse of interplanetary dimensions.

The possibility that polar bears are drowning on Neptune at this very moment cannot be ruled out.

Not the Neptunian polar bears! Curse you, George W. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuush!

Carbon debits?

We all know what a sham carbon indulgences...er, "offsets"/"credits"...are by now. Well, how about "carbon credits"? From Moonbattery:

Are you annoyed at the way high-profile indulgers in conspicuous energy consumption like Al Gore attempt to exempt themselves from the sacrifices they demand of everyone else by purchasing phony carbon credits? Don't just grouse — do something about it. Counteract the carbon credits with carbon debits at CarbonCreditKillers.com.

Carbon debits can be purchased for as little as $5. With each carbon debit, CarbonCreditKillers.com will shred one living tree, send an email informing Al Gore, and send another to you certifying that you have done your part to put an end to the carbon credits scam.

Various packages feature extras like having "I Took Away Your Carbon Credits" plaques sent to liberal friends. Those willing to spring for the Premier Carbon Debit Vacation Package get the following:

Airfare to Arizona from any continental US state.

1 day of carbon debiting using their tree-crushing FECON grinding head tractor — an average of 100 trees debited in a day.

1 "My Carbon Footprint Is Bigger Than Yours" t-shirt with an imprint of you in the seat of the tree-killer.

1 "Carbon Debit Gold Star Member" plaque.

1 "I Took Away Your Carbon Credits" plaque sent to Al Gore.

1 "I Increased My Carbon Footprint" t-shirt.

CarbonCreditKillers.com can't guarantee they are actually harming the environment, since the trees are apparently slated for removal anyway, but they do promise that trees will be destroyed at your expense — which is more of a guarantee than gullible moonbats are getting from swindlers like TerraPass.

I abso-freakin'-lutely love it! I wish I had thought of it!

More proof that global "warming" is a religion

Or, more accurately, like a cult. From (not surprisingly) California:

Visitors to the Gaia (you just can't make this kind of stuff up, folks! - Ed.) Napa Valley Hotel and Spa won't find the Gideon Bible in the nightstand drawer. Instead, on the bureau will be a copy of "An Inconvenient Truth," former Vice President Al Gore's book about global warming.

They'll also find the Gaia equipped with waterless urinals, solar lighting and recycled paper as it marches toward becoming California's first hotel certified as "green," or benevolent to the environment. Similar features are found 35 miles south at San Francisco's Orchard Garden Hotel, which competes for customers with neighboring luxury hotels like the Ritz-Carlton and Fairmont.

"I'm not your traditional Birkenstocks and granola type of guy," (of COURSE you're not! - Ed.) said Stefan Muehle, general manager of the Orchard Garden, who said green measures are reducing energy costs as much as 25 percent a month. "We're trying to dispel the myth that being green and being luxurious are mutually exclusive."

I do hope they ignore Sheryl Crow and have more than one square of butt ribbon per bathroom.

"The High Cost of Easily Accessible Beans"

Van Helsing at Moonbattery nails this one out of the park.

It is common knowledge that beans cause the dreadful phenomenon known as flatulence, a major contributor to the global warming that will soon embroil us all in a sweaty apocalypse. Nonetheless, beans are readily available to anyone who wants to purchase them, despite the absence of explicit Constitutional protection as we have for firearms. So far as I know, beans are not even regulated.

Now we see the consequences:
...
The picture is of movie star Hugh Grant, assaulting a photographer with a tub of baked beans. Grant was subsequently arrested.

It's time for us to ask ourselves: would this incident have occurred if beans were subject to prudent federal regulation?

They can have my black beans when they pry the can from my cold, dead fingers! :-D

Dems' big #ss carbon footprints heading to debate

From Newsday:

A flock of small jets took flight from Washington Thursday, each carrying a Democratic presidential candidate to South Carolina for the first debate of the political season.

For Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, it was wheels up shortly after they voted in favor of legislation requiring that U.S. troops begin returning home from Iraq in the fall.

No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.

They rake Bush and skeptics who haven't swigged their Chicken Little Kool-Aid over the coals for his not doing enough to combat global "warming", yet they hypocritically contribute to the (perceived) problem themselves.

Also, about that "culture of corruption" thingy:

Democrat John Edwards, for example, regularly uses a jet owned by Dallas trial lawyer Fred Baron, who is also the finance chairman of his presidential campaign. His campaign pays first-class rate for those flights. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also flies on corporate jets and pays first-class rates.

Under FEC reimbursement regulations, a candidate flying in a corporate or union jet must pay the first-class rate unless the flight's destination does not have scheduled commercial service. In that case, the candidate must pay the cost of chartering the plane.

For candidates who are now eschewing corporate jets, the cost difference can be significant.

For example, a one-way first class ticket on United Airlines with four days advance notice is $694 per person. A typical one-way charter flight on a small Lear jet seating six people would cost about $9,000.

Critics of corporate jet flights for politicians say the difference in cost makes a private jet an extraordinary special benefit and can give corporate executives or union leaders unusual access to a candidate.

But remember: a special interest isn't really a special interest if it's a Democrat interest.

Not that the left's hypocrisy is astounding to me, but I must point it out nonetheless.

About that "consensus" thing...

Next time you hear some leftard or the MSM (pardon the redundancy) spout the trying-to-shout-down-the-opposition argument-ending "scientific consensus" crap about global "warming", ask yourself this simple question:

With 17,100 scientists (and growing) rejecting the Chicken Little man-made global "warming" junk science, doesn't that, by definition, destroy the "scientific consensus" nonsense?

Carbon "offsets" shell game

Those of us who don't buy into the junk science of global "warming" and the indulgences-like "feel-good hype" scheme known as carbon "offsets" don't find thing like this all that surprising:

Companies and individuals rushing to go green have been spending millions on “carbon credit” projects that yield few if any environmental benefits.

A Financial Times investigation has uncovered widespread failings in the new markets for greenhouse gases, suggesting some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take place.

Others are meanwhile making big profits from carbon trading for very small expenditure and in some cases for clean-ups that they would have made anyway.

The growing political salience of environmental politics has sparked a “green gold rush”, which has seen a dramatic expansion in the number of businesses offering both companies and individuals the chance to go “carbon neutral”, offsetting their own energy use by buying carbon credits that cancel out their contribution to global warming.
...
The FT investigation found:

■ Widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.

■ Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

■ Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

■ A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

■ Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

Francis Sullivan, environment adviser at HSBC, the UK’s biggest bank that went carbon-neutral in 2005, said he found “serious credibility concerns” in the offsetting market after evaluating it for several months.

“The police, the fraud squad and trading standards need to be looking into this. Otherwise people will lose faith in it,” he said.

You can't lose faith in something in which you never had faith to begin with, sir. Carbon offsets are a fraud, pure and simple, no other way around it.

By the way, ask yourself this: if Big Oil, Big Pharmaceutical, or Big (insert bogeyman industry here) were doing any of the bulletpoints above, do you think the MSM would be as quiet about it as they are about the greenie fraudsters? Me neither.

Nice work by Citizens Journal on the Photoshop

UPDATED: Sheryl Crow's answer to global warming: wipe your pooper with one square!

UPDATE BELOW.

Why Hollyweirdos are better seen and not heard. Well, she makes a living singing, so she has to be heard, but you get my drift. Anywho, from Lance Armstrong's ex, via Hot Air:

Green earth = brown hand!

Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of forest conservation which we heavily rely on for oxygen. I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required. When presenting this idea to my younger brother, who’s judgment I trust implicitly, he proposed taking it one step further. I believe his quote was, “how bout just washing the one square out.”

Hey, it’s “think globally, act locally,” not “think globally, act locally except for your pooper.”

Exit question one: Just how, um, tidy are Sheryl Crow’s evacuations that one thin square of toilet paper is enough to do the trick? You think the Goracle gets by with one?

Sheryl may trust her brother's judgment, but I certainly don't. Not if he's telling me to wipe with one square and rinse it off afterwards! I'd like to think she's joking, but with these Hollyweirdo types, you can never be certain.

Come on, people...you just knew I'd be back to my juvenile self in no time.

UPDATE (4/23/2003 - 9:53 A.M. EST): While Crow is imploring us to use one square of TP for our bungholes in order to keep the planet from baking, she has no objections to having four carbon-spewing tour busses, three gas-guzzling tractor-trailers, and six cars for her own personal usage. I tell you, between her and Gore and the Silky Pony living the energy-gorging lifestyles they tell us is killing the planet, they certainly don't seem too concerned about it...ergo, why should we be?

Storm front's damage

Floods in New York and New Jersey. Winds are beating down D.C. Snow, winds, tornados...everywhere. Record cold temperatures here in Florida.

You know what caused this mess, don't you? No, it wasn't a Nor'easter. It was Chimpy McHitlerburton'$ evil Rovian anti-Kyoto global "warming" machine! MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Speaking of which, some global "warming" Chicken Littles braved freezing cold temperatures (and obvious undermining irony) to alert the world to how serious global "warming" really is. Other activists, however, pansied out and opted not to freeze in the "feverish" elements.

Irony...it's not just for breakfast anymore!