If you're a climate change denier, you're immoral

This is current position of Paul Krugman in his latest column (Betraying the Planet) and very likely the genuine consensus of man-made global warming proponents. I don't believe there is a face nor a palm large enough to capture the kind of facepalm this kind of contention requires.

The very idea that denying what very could be an honest mistake made by those who are eternally preoccupied the health of Mother Gaia as being immoral is obscene. The contention that global warming denying is tantamount to things like thieving, lying, bullying, assaulting, even murder, is asinine.

It is interesting to note that Prof. Krugman juxtaposes the fear-mongering he espouses to that of the Bush administration's in regards to terrorism. When Bush et al asserted that terrorism posed an existential threat, Prof. Krugman recognized it as hyperbole. What is curious to note is how relevantly similar the two theories are yet the Nobel laurete is incapable of removing his liberal colored lenses to see it. The plausibility for Islamic fanaticism to become an existential threat is dependent on a long term model. That is if Al Qaeda were successful in uniting the Ummah as one therocratic nation state which had dominion over a majority of the world's oil wealth AND had nuclear capability...who in their right mind would deny that that would an existential threat to the United States? Plausible? Yes. Likely? No.

Similarly the peril of man-made global warming theory is also dependent on a long term model. If carbon was to accumulate to 450 ppm in the atomosphere, over the next century tempertures would be of such catastrophic magnitude that all life would be indanger of becoming extinct. Plausible? Only if carbon emissions really were the most decisive variable in the complex system that is climate and temperture...and it isn't. Likely? No way.

And the above analysis, denying the imperilment of carbon emissions is deemed IMMORAL to those who wear liberal colored lenses.

Which brings us to the relevant difference between the two theories compared by Prof. Krugman. While the existential threat of terrorism is questionable, what isn't is the depths of its immorality. Terrorism by religious psychotics is unquestionably evil. Resources devoted to impugning such evil are resources well spent.

Contrast to carbon emissions. Emiting carbon is amoral. In fact carbon is necessary for life. It is what all life forms are even based on. It is what makes the organic, well organic. Thus, raising doubts as to whether treasure and resources should be devoted to reducing its prescence must also be amoral, lest of course one wears liberal colored lenses.

Energy reform = electricity rates

I found this flashback clip particularly amusing. Here the then presidential candidate was candid and honest about his position on energy reform. Carbon is now evil, and its emissions must be reduced. The best way of achieving this is to make it costly to emit carbon.

Thus taxing carbon emission is the most honest way of going about reducing carbon emissions if one truly contends that carbon is the culprit of climate change.

Yet the 1,200 page cap and trade bill that passed the house (and will hopefully be doomed in the Senate) makes consideration to NOT raise electricity rates. So it effectively does NOTHING in the goal it sets out to do, that is reduce carbon emissions.

If per chance this does pass the senate and lands on the President's desk, we'll see how much integrity he has on this issue and if he vetoes it.

That really would be change.

You know it's bad when...

The German media says, "Schize!" when analyzing your fiscal policy.

OBAMA'S MISTAKES

Chancellor Merkel Visits the Debt President

Tilting at Green Windmills

Tilting at Green Windmills

Shared via AddThis

George Will asks what is pertinent, yet is easily discarded by our current politicians in power: why copy Spain's green economy when they have almost twice the unemployment rate we have?

Are we to believe that if it weren't for windmills and such that Spain would be even worse off?

Now I'll read from quatrain 22 of the book of Lionel prophecy's:

Tis the year 2012 and the loss of productivity has increased substantially, and the eared one declares, "My policies have saved jobs that would otherwise have been lost if I weren't elected. Lost because of the terrible economic conditions I have inherited from my predecessor, Yes WE Can!"

And as PT Barnum once said, "No one has ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

Could Australia Blow Apart the Great Global Warming Scare?

Could Australia Blow Apart the Great Global Warming Scare?

Shared via AddThis

Hysterics have to come to an end when dogma finally succumbs the preponderance of evidence and its logical conclusions.

Ian Plimer has apparently offered that very thing, his book is due out in the US July 1st, it will be on my summer reading list.

Privatize the Post Office

Privatize the Post Office

Posted using ShareThis

No brainer. I thought it hilarious that Jon Stewart would use this as a reason for the public option for health care.

Please don't afford me civility, but recognize my occupation

One of my representatives in the Senate completely embarrassed herself last week and by default embarrassed my state.

It is customary which is to say honorific in the military to address one's superior officers as Sir or Ma'am and to address subordinates by their title. Apparently Sen. Boxer is ignorant of this custom and as a result looked foolish.

The real folly as argued by Dennis Prager in his column this week is that it would have to of been a Democrat woman to have made such a boneheaded remark, because of a victimized mindset. No male politician in his right mind would think of correcting a general for having afforded him in what is a polite custom.

Dennis Prager offers the following pithy analysis:

Liberalism has lowered expectations of behavior for everyone in America except white Christian heterosexual males. They are the only Americans from whom dignified and mature conduct is always expected. Liberals treat women, blacks, Hispanics, gays, and many non-Christians, with what is known as the soft bigotry of low expectations. Many liberal women, blacks, Hispanics, and gays know that and use it to get away with conduct and speech that no WASP heterosexual male could. People rise or descend to the level of behavior expected of them.

2010 cannot come soon enough.

Initial post

This is an outlet. Instead of tormenting my friends and associates of social networking sites with my daily musings and rants of the news of the day, I decided to channel my tirades here in the blogosphere.

I hope you enjoy it.