Today's Rants-N-Raves

Today is Bash Rick Perry Day.

I've included some blogs on pollution in Texas and how our coal-fired power plants are hurting our environment and our children. 

I feel that today's topic is especially relevant considering the fact that the U.S. House of Representatives is debating coal ash pollution on the on the House floor today. 

It's interesting to hear how Republican Congressmen defend the big polluters and "job creators" while smash mouthing the EPA  "human savers".

Thanks for reading...

Texas is Nation's Worst Mercury Polluter

Here are some facts about mercury pollution quoted from news-journal.com in Longview, Texas.  This issue is being debated right now in the U.S. Congress.The link to the full story is here: Mercury Pollution in Texas

Exposures to mercury can affect the human nervous system and harm the brain, heart, kidneys, lungs and immune system.

Mercury pollution comes from coal-fired power plants.

The most common way we are exposed is by eating fish or shellfish contaminated with mercury.

The report claims coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury pollution in the United States. Mercury settles out of the air into rivers and lakes, moving into the human food chain through fish and animal. In large doses, it can damage the brain and other vital organs.

Luminant’s Monticello Steam Electric Station and Lignite Mine near Mount Pleasant emits 1,828 pounds of mercury every year, the report indicated. That ranks it fifth in the nation.

Texas Likes Pollution - Kids Suffer

Ever look at who is paying your congressman in Texas to be re-elected?  It might be worth a good look.  Seems that if Texas were a country, we would be the 8th biggest polluter in the world.  Holy freakin!!!
What needs to be understood here, is that Big Polluters pay our Texas congressmen big bucks to fight against clean air,clean water and an atmosphere that is hazardous to our health and induces asthma in our children. 
Check out this story about how the EPA is wanting to crack down on Texas polluters and other large polluters throughout the country: Big Texas Polluters

Then, once your finished with that, check out how Rick Perry loves to pick a fight with EPA and the "pollution solvers": Top 10 Things Rick Perry Doesn't Want You to Know

World Governments Planning Ahead for Mass Extinction

This is scary folks.  While corporations and politicians deny the realities of Global Warming, World Governments are creating a "vault" to preserve seeds of life.

What I want to know is - how can I work at this place?  This is where you want to be when the "shit hits the fan", so to speak.

Read the story here: Extinction Planning

Rick Perry Persecuted by Christians

Dear Anita Perry,

Good job sticking up for your man. But he's not losing because he is the only true "Conservative".  Your husband is losing because he's a "Wack Job".

You can read her rants-n-raves here: Rick Perry Thrown to Lions by Christians

Big Oil Payments to Rick Perry

Ever wonder how much money Gov. Rick has received from Big Oil? Thousands? Millions?  Try $11 million.  So is it any wonder he denies pro-environment science and reasons with the side of Big Oil?

The story is here: Rick Likes Oil

Rick Perry & Scientific Censorship

I know it's a shock, but Rick Perry and his administration have been hiding and censoring scientific data that shows that the people of Texas may be in danger of rising sea levels, and are under great risks from natural disasters due to global warming.  Scientists in Texas can't even use the words "climate change".

Geesh, when will the people of Texas get enough of this guy?! 

The story from Climate Progress by Joe Romm is here: Rick Perry Hates Science

Drought Update for Austin & San Antonio

DROUGHT INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AUSTIN/SAN ANTONIO TX
1127 AM CDT THU OCT 6 2011

...ALL OF SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS...THE HILL COUNTRY AND RIO
GRANDE PLAINS REMAIN IN SEVERE TO EXCEPTIONAL DROUGHT STATUS...

SYNOPSIS...
THE DROUGHT CONTINUES ACROSS SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS AND THE ENTIRE
STATE. SEPTEMBER WAS VERY DRY THE FIRST HALF OF THE MONTH...WITH
NUMEROUS WILDFIRES. THE LAST HALF OF THE MONTH SAW A COUPLE OF
RAINFALL EVENTS THAT PRODUCED ISOLATED TO WIDELY SCATTERED SHOWERS
AND THUNDERSTORMS. SOME LOCATIONS DID RECEIVE BENEFICIAL RAINFALL
TO PROVIDE SHORT TERM RELIEF. HOWEVER...THERE WERE MANY LOCATIONS
THAT RECEIVED LITTLE OR NO RAINFALL. THE FIRST 5 DAYS OF OCTOBER
HAVE ALSO BEEN DRY...BUT A STORM SYSTEM IS EXPECTED TO IMPACT THE
AREA OVER THE WEEKEND AND THIS SHOULD ONCE AGAIN PROVIDE SOME
SHORT TERM DROUGHT RELIEF. WHAT THE STATE NEEDS IS SEVERAL
WIDESPREAD RAINFALL EVENTS OVER SEVERAL MONTHS TO BEGIN TO MAKE A
SIGNIFICANT DENT IN THE RAINFALL DEFICITS.

THE LA NINA PATTERN IS EXPECTED TO CONTINUE ACROSS THE EQUATORIAL
PACIFIC THROUGH THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE WINTER. THIS USUALLY
MEANS BELOW AVERAGE RAINFALL AND WARMER THAN AVERAGE TEMPERATURES
DURING THE LATE FALL AND INTO THE WINTER ACROSS SOUTH CENTRAL
TEXAS.

THE US DROUGHT MONITOR (USDM) VALID OCTOBER 4TH AND ISSUED ON
OCTOBER 6TH...SHOWED ALL OF THE HILL COUNTRY AND SOUTH CENTRAL
TEXAS IN SEVERE (D2) TO EXCEPTIONAL DROUGHT (D4) CONDITIONS.

SEVERE DROUGHT (D2) CONDITIONS WERE PRESENT OVER SOUTHERN
VAL VERDE AND THE NORTHWESTERN PART OF MAVERICK COUNTY.

EXTREME DROUGHT (D3) CONDITIONS WERE PRESENT ACROSS PORTIONS OF
CENTRAL VAL VERDE...EDWARDS AND THE NORTHERN HALF OF MAVERICK
COUNTIES.

EXCEPTIONAL DROUGHT (D4) CONDITIONS WERE PRESENT ACROSS THE
REMAINDER OF SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS.

MOST OF THE STATE IS CURRENTLY IN MODERATE DROUGHT (D1) TO
EXCEPTIONAL DROUGHT (D4). NINETY-SEVEN PERCENT OF THE STATE IS IN
EXTREME (D3) TO EXCEPTIONAL (D4) DROUGHT STATUS AND EIGHTY-EIGHT
PERCENT OF THE STATE IS IN EXCEPTIONAL (D4) DROUGHT STATUS.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS...

FIRE DANGER IMPACTS...

FIRE DANGER IS CURRENTLY HIGH TO VERY HIGH AND WILL REMAIN AT
THESE LEVELS UNTIL WETTING RAINS ARE OBSERVED. AS OF OCTOBER
6TH...BURN BANS WERE IN EFFECT FOR ALL 33 COUNTIES IN SOUTH
CENTRAL TEXAS. THE COUNTIES WITH ESTABLISHED OUTDOOR BURN BANS
INCLUDE ATASCOSA...BANDERA...BASTROP...BEXAR...BLANCO...
BURNET...CALDWELL...COMAL...DEWITT...DIMMIT...EDWARDS...
FAYETTE...FRIO...GILLESPIE...GONZALES...GUADALUPE...HAYS...
KARNES...KENDALL...KERR...KINNEY...LAVACA...LEE...LLANO...
MAVERICK...MEDINA...REAL...TRAVIS...UVALDE... VAL
VERDE...WILLIAMSON... WILSON AND ZAVALA COUNTIES.

THERE ARE CURRENTLY 251 COUNTIES OUT OF 254 COUNTIES STATE-WIDE
WITH ESTABLISHED BURN BANS IN PLACE. RESIDENTS IN ALL COUNTIES
SHOULD CONTACT THEIR LOCAL COUNTY JUDGE`S OFFICE BEFORE DECIDING
TO CONDUCT ANY TYPE OF OUTDOOR BURNING.

THE OCTOBER 4TH KEETCH-BYRAM DROUGHT INDEX (KBDI) SHOWED KBDI
VALUES RANGED FROM 600 TO 800 ACROSS ALL OF THE AREA.

THE TEXAS FOREST SERVICE USES THE KBDI AS A MEANS FOR RELATING
CURRENT AND RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS TO POTENTIAL OR EXPECTED
FIRE BEHAVIOR. THE KBDI IS A NUMERICAL INDEX CALCULATED DAILY
FOR EACH COUNTY. EACH NUMBER IS AN ESTIMATE OF THE AMOUNT OF
PRECIPITATION...IN HUNDREDTHS OF AN INCH... NEEDED TO BRING THE
SOIL BACK TO SATURATION. THE INDEX RANGES FROM ZERO TO 800...
WITH ZERO REPRESENTING A SATURATED SOIL AND 800 A COMPLETELY
DRY SOIL. REMEMBER...THAT FIRE DANGER CAN CHANGE QUICKLY FROM
ONE DAY TO ANOTHER AS WINDS AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY VARY.

AGRICULTURAL IMPACTS...

THE OCTOBER 4TH TEXAS CROP AND WEATHER REPORT ISSUED BY TEXAS A
AND M AGRICULTURAL PROGRAM...INDICATED SOME AREAS RECEIVED
SCATTERED RAINS AND COOLER TEMPERATURES...BUT EXTREMELY DRY
CONDITIONS PREVAILED. LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS CONTINUED TO PROVIDE
SUPPLEMENTAL FEED TO CATTLE OR TO LIQUIDATE HERDS. THERE WAS
LITTLE OR NO SIGN OF APPRECIABLE FORAGE GROWTH. SOME PRODUCERS
WERE PREPARING TO PLANT PASTURES.

CLIMATE SUMMARY...

THE WATER YEAR OCTOBER 1, 2010 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2011 WAS ONE
OF THE DRIEST PERIODS ON RECORD. ALL LOCATIONS ARE CURRENTLY
REPORTING AT LEAST TEN TO TWENTY INCH DEFICITS FOR THE YEAR TO
DATE. OUT WEST ACROSS THE RIO GRANDE PLAINS THE RAINFALL DEFICITS
RANGE FROM 5 TO 10 INCHES.

PRECIPITATION FROM JANUARY 1, 2011 TO MIDNIGHT OCTOBER 5, 2011 AND
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL:

                 2011 RAINFALL   NORMAL TO DATE   DEPARTURE
AUSTIN MABRY        9.65              25.53        -15.88
AUSTIN BERGSTROM    8.01              23.50        -15.49
SAN ANTONIO         9.65              24.57        -14.92
DEL RIO             7.80              16.16         -8.36

THROUGH MIDNIGHT OCTOBER 5TH...DEL RIO HAS RECEIVED NO RAIN.
THIS IS 0.45 OF AN INCH BELOW THE NORMAL OF 0.45 OF AN INCH.
THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE FOR OCTOBER TO DATE IS 75.2 DEGREES.
THIS IS 0.2 DEGREES BELOW THE NORMAL OF 75.4 DEGREES.

THROUGH MIDNIGHT OCTOBER 5TH...SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL HAS
RECEIVED NO RAIN. THIS IS 0.60 OF AN INCH BELOW THE NORMAL OF
0.60 OF AN INCH. THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AT SAN ANTONIO
INTERNATIONAL FOR OCTOBER TO DATE IS 73.4 DEGREES. THIS IS 1.2
DEGREES BELOW THE NORMAL OF 74.6 DEGREES.

THROUGH MIDNIGHT OCTOBER 5TH...AUSTIN CAMP MABRY HAS RECEIVED
NO RAIN. THIS IS 0.53 OF AN INCH BELOW THE NORMAL OF 0.53 OF
AN INCH. THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE FOR OCTOBER TO DATE AT AUSTIN
MABRY IS 74.4 DEGREES. THIS IS 0.4 DEGREES ABOVE THE NORMAL OF
74.8 DEGREES.

THROUGH MIDNIGHT OCTOBER 5TH..AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL HAS
RECEIVED NO RAIN. THIS IS 0.50 OF AN INCH BELOW THE NORMAL OF
0.50 OF AN INCH. THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE FOR OCTOBER TO DATE AT
AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL IS 69.4 DEGREES. THIS IS 3.6
DEGREES BELOW THE NORMAL OF 73.0 DEGREES.

PRECIPITATION/TEMPERATURE OUTLOOK...

DURING THE NEXT 5 DAYS...WIDELY SCATTERED TO SCATTERED RAINFALL
IS POSSIBLE THROUGH EARLY ON MONDAY (OCTOBER 10TH). AFTER THE NEXT
FEW DAYS DRIER CONDITIONS WILL RETURN ONCE AGAIN. TEMPERATURES
WILL REMAIN NEAR OR ABOVE NORMAL THROUGH THE PERIOD.

THE LATEST CLIMATE PREDICTION CENTER (CPC) 8 TO 14 DAY OUTLOOK
ISSUED ON OCTOBER 5TH AND VALID OCTOBER 13TH THROUGH OCTOBER 19TH
IS CALLING FOR GREATER CHANCES FOR ABOVE NORMAL TEMPERATURES AND
GREATER CHANCES FOR BELOW NORMAL RAINFALL.

THE LONGER RANGE OUTLOOK FOR NOVEMBER 2011 THROUGH JANUARY
2011...CREATED ON SEPTEMBER 15TH IS CALLING FOR GREATER CHANCES
FOR ABOVE NORMAL TEMPERATURES AND GREATER CHANCES FOR BELOW NORMAL
RAINFALL.

HYDROLOGIC SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK...

WITH THE CONTINUATION OF WARMER THAN AVERAGE TEMPERATURES AND
LACK OF RAINFALL...EVAPORATION RATES REMAIN HIGH. THIS COMBINED
WITH HIGH WATER USAGE CONTINUES TO CAUSE AREA LAKES AND
RESERVOIRS TO FALL.

HYDROLOGIC AND AGRICULTURAL IMPACTS CONTINUE ACROSS THE
REGION FROM THE CURRENT DROUGHT. MANY STOCK TANKS REMAIN
EXTREMELY LOW AND MANY HAVE DRIED UP.

THE 7 DAY STREAM FLOW AVERAGE IS IN THE TO 10 TO 24 PERCENT
(BELOW NORMAL) RANGE OR LESS THAN 10 PERCENT (MUCH BELOW) FOR
BASINS ACROSS SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS AND THE RIO GRANDE PLAINS.

RESERVOIR CONDITIONS AS OF OCTOBER 6TH...

AREA LAKES...RIVERS AND RESERVOIRS REMAIN WELL BELOW NORMAL
POOL ELEVATIONS. LEVELS ARE LIKELY TO CONTINUE FALLING AS THE
DROUGHT CONTINUES AND EVAPORATION RATES REMAIN HIGH.

BELOW IS A LIST OF RESERVOIRS WITH THE LATEST ELEVATIONS AND
NORMAL POOLS.

                NORMAL POOL (FT)     LATEST ELEVATION (FT)
MEDINA LAKE         1064.2                 1019.71
CANYON LAKE          909                    900.13
LAKE TRAVIS          681                    628.28
LAKE BUCHANAN       1020                    987.95
LAKE GEORGETOWN      791                    766.13
LAKE AMISTAD        1117                   1109.82

RESTRICTIONS...

THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM (SAWS) REMAINS IN STAGE 2 WATER
RESTRICTIONS. THE MANDATORY RESTRICTIONS AND SPOTTY RAIN HAVE
HELPED TO KEEP THE EDWARDS AQUIFER LEVEL ABOVE THE STAGE 3
LEVEL OF 640 FEET.

THE EDWARDS AQUIFER IS CURRENTLY READING 643.0 FEET AS OF
OCTOBER 6TH. THIS IS 21.5 FEET BELOW THE HISTORICAL MONTHLY
AVERAGE FOR OCTOBER WHICH IS 664.5 FEET. THE AQUIFER LEVEL
IS 32.8 FEET BELOW THE LEVEL OBSERVED AT THIS TIME IN OCTOBER
2010.

THERE ARE SEVERAL STEPS CURRENTLY BEING TAKEN BY THE EDWARDS
AQUIFER AUTHORITY TO INSURE THAT EVEN IF THE AQUIFER FALLS
BELOW 640 FEET...STAGE 3 RESTRICTIONS MAY NOT NEED TO BE
IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY. ONCE NEW RESTRICTIONS ARE IN PLACE
THEY WILL REMAIN IN PLACE FOR 30 DAYS. EVEN IF THE LEVEL OF
THE AQUIFER WERE TO RISE ABOVE THE TRIGGER LEVEL THE RESTRICTIONS
REMAIN IN PLACE.

MANY COMMUNITIES ACROSS SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS HAVE IMPLEMENTED
THE FIRST...SECOND...THIRD AND FOURTH STAGES OF WATER
RESTRICTIONS DUE TO THE CONTINUED DRY CONDITIONS AND DECREASING
WATER SUPPLIES.

AUSTIN REMAINS IN STAGE 2 WATER RESTRICTIONS...SAN MARCOS REMAINS
IN STAGE 2 WATER RESTRICTIONS AND THE CITY OF KERRVILLE IS CURRENTLY
IN STAGE 4 WATER RESTRICTIONS.

LOCATIONS THAT DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE MANDATORY RESTRICTIONS
CONTINUE TO STRONGLY PROMOTE YEAR ROUND WATER CONSERVATION.

NEXT ISSUANCE DATE...

THIS STATEMENT WILL BE UPDATED AROUND OCTOBER 20, 2011 OR
SOONER IF NECESSARY.

&&

RELATED WEB SITES...

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THE DROUGHT IMPACTING SOUTH CENTRAL
TEXAS...PLEASE VISIT THE FOLLOWING WEB ADDRESSES.
(ADDRESSES SHOULD BE IN ALL LOWER CASE)

AUSTIN/SAN ANTONIO NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE:
HTTP://WWW.WEATHER.GOV/AUSTIN

NOAA DROUGHT INFORMATION CENTER:
HTTP://WWW.DROUGHT.NOAA.GOV

CLIMATE PREDICTION CENTER:
HTTP://WWW.CPC.NCEP.NOAA.GOV

U.S. DROUGHT MONITOR:
HTTP://DROUGHTMONITOR.UNL.EDU/

OFFICE OF THE TEXAS STATE CLIMATOLOGIST:
HTTP://WWW.MET.TAMU.EDU/OSC/

UNITED STATES GEOLOGIC SURVEY (USGS):
HTTP://WATER.USGS.GOV/

UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE):
HTTP://WWW.SWF.USACE.ARMY.MIL/

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION:
HTTP://WWW.IBWC.STATE.GOV

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...

THE DROUGHT MONITOR IS A MULTI-AGENCY EFFORT INVOLVING NOAA/S
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AND NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER...THE
USDA...STATE AND REGIONAL CENTER CLIMATOLOGIST AND THE NATIONAL
DROUGHT MITIGATION CENTER. INFORMATION FOR THIS STATEMENT HAS
BEEN GATHERED FROM NWS AND FAA OBSERVATION SITES...STATE
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICES...THE USACE AND USGS.

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS...

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUND THIS DROUGHT
INFORMATION STATEMENT...PLEASE CONTACT...

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE
2090 AIRPORT ROAD
NEW BRAUNFELS TEXAS  78130
830-606-3617

$$

Denialism Deck of Cards: "DoLittle and Delay"

I think it's not only important to know what the arguments are against Climate Change, but to also know how Deniers cause the public, and public policy makers to doubt and confuse the science on Climate Change.

The following article is from the denialism blog.  It is one of my favorite blogs because it shows the methods, techniques, and psychology behind how the professional Deniers sow their misinformation: http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/05/denialists_deck_of_cards_the_3.php
This is only one excerpt from the entire article on the Denialism Deck of Cards.  You can click on the link to get the full "deck of cards".

Denialists' Deck of Cards: "DoLittle and DeLay"
Category: Denialists' Deck of Cards
Posted on: May 4, 2007 9:28 AM, by Chris H


A great "wait and see" tactic is to "shift the goal posts." The denialist does by stating, "we don't know that there is a problem until X is demonstrated." The denialist will set unrealistic expectations for X, and if X is shown, it can easily be changed to Y. In the climate change debate, denialists claimed that we did not have enough historical information to make determinations about global temperatures. In 1998, Michael Mann's research allowed scientists to view 1,000 years of temperature data. That wasn't enough for the denialists. New advances enable a far deeper knowledge of global temperature, but with each new advance, denialists say it does not go far enough.
Another is to delay by calling for a study of the non-existent problem. I call this the Mustapha Mond option. In the California RFID debate, industry lobbyists argued against setting security and privacy standards, and instead suggested that a "study committee" be formed. This committee would produce a non-binding report with recommendations, some time in the future. This buys the industry time, and then allows a completely new debate over whether the study was proper.

Climate Change Denialism: Moving the Goalposts or Impossible Expectations

Ever try to convince a global warming skeptic their wrong?  Moving the goalposts or impossible expectations is a favorite among those who refuse to believe.  This tactic is explained below, and it sums up nicely why, when regardless of the evidence, they will refuse to believe the science behind global warming:

Moving the goalposts or impossible expectations is the tendency to refuse to accept when denialists' challenges to the science have been addressed. Instead, they just come up with new challenges for you to prove before they say they'll believe the theory. Worse, they just repeat their challenges over and over again ad nauseum.

This may be their most frustrating tactic because every time you think you've satisfied a challenge, they just invent a new one. The joke in evolutionary biology is that every time you find a transitional fossil all you do is create two new gaps on the fossil record, one on either side of the discovery. Similarly with global warming denialism, there is no end to the challenges that denialists claim they need to have satisfied before they'll come on board.

It's important to recognise that you shouldn't play their game. They'll never be satisfied because they simply don't want to believe the science – for ideological reasons. In the US, global warming denialism usually stems from free-market fundamentalism that is terrified of regulation and any suggestion there should be control of business.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/mar/10/climate-change-denier

Global Warming Negationist: Frederick Seitz

Chairman, Science and Environmental Policy Project.Chairman Emeritus, George Marshall Institute. President Emeritus, Rockefeller University. Board Member, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. Former Science Advisory Board, The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition.

A June 2000 Business Week article referred to physicist Frederick Seitz as "the granddaddy of global-warming skeptics". Seitz was once a director and shareholder of a company that operated coal-fired power plants.

Dr. Seitz is a former President of the National Academy of Sciences, but the Academy disassociated itself from Seitz in 1998 when Seitz headed up a report designed to look like an NAS journal article saying that carbon dioxide poses no threat to climate. The report, which was supposedly signed by 15,000 scientists, advocated the abandonment of the Kyoto Protocol. The NAS went to unusual lengths to publically distance itself from Seitz' article. Seitz signed the 1995 Leipzig Declaration.

Seitz is a recipient of the National Medal of Science. "In 1983 he reeived the Fourth Vannevar Bush Award presented by the National Science Board of the National Science Foundation and the R. Loveland Memorial Award of the American College of Physicians. Dr. Seitz is currently a member of the New York City Commission for Science and Technology and has served as chair of the United States delegation to the U.N. Committee on Science and Technology for Development." (Seitz biography)

In 1998, Seitz wrote and circulated a letter, asking scientists to sign a petition asking the Government to reject the Kyoto Protocol. Seitz signed the letter and identifed himself as a former president of the National Academy of Sciences. He also directed attention to a report by Dr. Arthur Robinson, which concluded that carbon dioxide posed no threat to climate. The report was not peer-reviewed, but was formatted to look like an NAS journal article. The NAS later issued a statement disassociating itself from the petition and the article.
Source: "Science Academy Disputes Attack on Global Warming," New York Times 4/22/98
Source: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=6

Global Warming Misinformer: Texas Public Policy Foundation

Texas Public Policy Foundation 411 Brazos St., Suite 99 Austin, TX 78701
Phone: 512-472-2700
Fax: 512-472-2728

TPPF is "guided by the core principles of limited government, free enterprise, private property rights and individual responsibility" (www.texaspolicy.com).

Chaired by Wendy Gramm, wife of Republican Senator Phil Gramm, TPPF has been active in environmental education issues. TPPF was part of a successful effort to ban a widely used environmental text book in Texas. Because the state buys so many text books, if publishers are forced to edit texts to meet the standards of anti-environmental foundations, it could impact the entire country's environmental education. (Mother Jones, "Re-writing Texas Texts, July/August 2002 http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2002/07/texas_texts.html)

Texas Public Policy Statement:

Far more substantial climate science emerges and is a game-changer for the reigning science from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Observational evidence from NASA satellites indicates little to no heat-forcing effect from manmade CO2. This NASA data is empirical science, far superior to the uncertain IPCC computer models. Source: ExxonMobil 2009 Worldwide Contributions and Community Investments

Texas Public Policy Foundation has received $45,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

Source: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=68

Global Warming Negationist: Heartland Institute, Heartland

19 South LaSalle St., Suite 903 Chicago, IL 60603
Phone: 312-377-4000
Founded in the early 1990s, Heartland Institute claims to apply "cutting-edge research to state and local public policy issues." Additionally, Heartland bills itself as "the marketing arm of the free-market movement." http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/orgdisplay.asp?Org=HEA100

The Heartland Institute created a website in the Spring of 2007, www.globalwarmingheartland.org, which asserts there is no scientific consensus on global warming and features a list of experts and a list of like-minded think tanks, many of whom have received funding from ExxonMobil and other polluters.
The Heartland Institute networks heavily with other conservative policy organizations, and is part of the State Policy Network, a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition (as of 4/04), and co-sponsored the 2001 Fly In for Freedom with the Wise Use umbrella group, Alliance for America. Heartland also co-sponsored a New York state Conference on Property Rights, hosted by the Property Rights Foundation of America. The Institute puts out several publications, including "Environment & Climate News" which frequently features anti-environmentalist and climate skeptic writing. They also published "Earth Day '96," a compilation of articles on environmental topics. The publication, distributed on college campuses, featured "Adventures in the Ozone Layer" by S. Fred Singer, and "the Cold Facts on Global Warming" by Sallie Baliunas. The articles denied the serious nature of ozone depletion and global warming.
Walter F. Buchholtz, an ExxonMobil executive, serves as Heartland's Government Relations Advisor, according to Heartland's 2005 IRS Form 990, pg. 15. http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2005/363/309/2005-363309812-0295fbb2-9.pdf
The Heartland Institute formerly sponsored and hosted www.climatesearch.org, a web page ostensibly dedicated to objective research on global warming, but at the same time presenting heavily biased research by organizations such as the American Petroleum Institute as an FAQ section.

Heartland Statement:
"Some environmentalists call for a "save-the-day" strategy to 'stop global warming,' saying it is better to be safe than sorry. Such a position seems logical until we stop to think: Immediate action wouldn't make us any safer, but it would surely make us poorer. And being poorer would make us less safe."Source: Heartland Institute "Instant Expert Guide: Global Warming"

Heartland Institute has received $676,500 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

Source: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=41

Global Warming Misinformer: Cato Institute

1000 Mass. Ave NW.Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-842-0200
Fax: 202-842-3490

The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Washington DC, was founded in 1977 by Edward Crane and Charles Koch, the billionaire co-owner of Koch Industries, the largest privately held oil company in the U.S.

The Cato Institute holds regular briefings on global warming with known climate 'skeptics' as panelists. In December 2003, panelists included Patrick Michaels, Robert Balling and John Christy, all of whom believe that the current scientific understanding of climate change is inconclusive. Cato held similar briefings on climate change in Washington in July 2003 and 2002. (C. Coon, & Erin. Hymel (2003) Sound Policy for the Energy Bill, Heritage Foundation Reports, 23 September. ) According to People for the American Way, Cato has been funded by: Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Bell Atlantic Network Services, BellSouth Corporation, Digital Equipment Corporation, GTE Corporation, Microsoft Corp- oration, Netscape Communications Corporation, NYNEX Corporation, Sun Microsystems, Viacom International, American Express, Chase Manhattan Bank, Chemical Bank, Citicorp/Citibank, Commonwealth Fund, Prudential Securities and Salomon Brothers. Energy conglomerates include: Chevron Companies, Exxon Company, Shell Oil Company and Tenneco Gas, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco Foundation and Atlantic Richfield Foundation. Cato's pharmaceutical donors include Eli Lilly & Company, Merck & Company and Pfizer, Inc. (http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9261) Between 1985 and 2001, the Institute received $15,718,040 in 112 grants from only ten conservative foundations: Castle Rock Foundation (reformed Coors Foundation), Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, Earhart Foundation, JM Foundation, John M. Olin Foundation, Inc., Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation, Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, Sarah Scaife Foundation, Carthage Foundation, David H Koch Foundation. (http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?51) The Cato Institute is a member of the State Policy Network 4/04

Cato Institute Statement:

"No known mechanism can stop global warming in the near term. International agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, would have no detectable effect on average temperature within any reasonable policy time frame of 50 years or so, even with full compliance."Source: Chapter 47 of the Cato Handbook for Congress, 107 Congress

Source: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=21

Global Warming Negationist: George C. Marshall Institute aka GMI

1625 K Street, NW, Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202-296-9655
Fax: 202-296-9714

Founded in 1984, The George Marshall Institute primarily focused on defense issues, advocating funding for Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative and Star Wars. GMI has since branched out and is one of the leading think tanks trying to debunk climate change.

GMI works on a range of issues, including civic environmentalism, climate change, national defense, bioterrorism, and missile defense. GMI publishes papers and holds "roundtables." Many of these roundtables have featured climate change skeptics such as Roger Bate, Willie Soon, Margo Thorning, and GMI's own Sallie Baliunas.
In 1989, the Marshall Institute released a report arguing that "cyclical variations in the intensity of the sun would offset any climate change associated with elevated greenhouse gases." Although it was refuted by the IPCC, the report was used by the Bush Sr. Administration to argue for a more lenient climate change policy. GMI has since published numerous reports and articles attacking the Kyoto protocol and undermining the climate science. GMI is a former member of the Cooler Heads Coalition.
GMI used to restrict its funding sources to private foundations and individual donars to avoid conflict of interest, but in the late nineties, then GMI President Jeffrey Salmon wrote, "when the Institute turned its attention to the science of global warming, it decided it would appeal successfully to industry for financial support." This fall, the Institute received its first-ever grant from a corporate foundation-- the Exxon Education Foundation. (http://web.archive.org/web/20020913050409/http://www.marshall.org/funding.htm)
According to Media Transparency.org, the Institute received $5,757,803 since 1985 from conservative foundations including the Castle Rock Foundation (Coors), Earhart Foundation, John M. Olin Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and the Carthage Foundation.

GMI Statement:
2 February, 2007
"Surface temperature records over recent decades and projections for the future are subject to continuing debate. The number of surface measuring stations has declined dramatically and the loss of that data may seriously affect the accuracy of surface temperature measurements. Without better, more accurate, and spatially comprehensive global surface measurements and the factors that influence them, the computer models used to project future temperatures do not have the certainty that is asserted for them." "While the [IPCC] SPM’s underlying assessment documents should provide an improved basis for evaluating the benefits of additional actions, the underlying state of knowledge does not justify scare tactics or provide sufficient support for proposals of the kind of actions being proposed by some industrial companies, environmental organizations and members of Congress to suppress energy use and impose large economic burdens on the US economy."
Source: George Marshall Institute, Statement on the IPCC Fourth Assessment SPM, Feb 2007 [PDF]

George C. Marshall Institute has received $840,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.


Source: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=36

NASA: Certain Facts about Earth's Climate are not in Dispute

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO₂ has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Source: NOAA)

NASA states these facts below:

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.² Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many JPL-designed instruments, such as AIRS. Increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in solar output, in the Earth’s orbit, and in greenhouse gas levels. They also show that in the past, large changes in climate have happened very quickly, geologically-speaking: in tens of years, not in millions or even thousands.³

² In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.

³ National Research Council (NRC), 2006. Surface Temperature Reconstructions For the Last 2,000 Years. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

CO2 Warming Dangers

Too much greenhouse effect: The atmosphere of Venus, like Mars, is nearly all carbon dioxide. But Venus has about 300 times as much carbon dioxide in its atmosphere as Earth and Mars do, producing a runaway greenhouse effect and a surface temperature hot enough to melt lead.

On Earth, human activities are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂). This happens because the coal or oil burning process combines carbon with oxygen in the air to make CO₂. To a lesser extent, the clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities have increased concentrations of greenhouse gases.

Source: http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Vatican: "Report by the Working Group Commissioned by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences"

The cost of action “pales in comparison to the price the world will pay if we fail to act now.”

We call on all people and nations to recognise the serious and potentially irreversible impacts of global warming caused by the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants, and by changes in forests, wetlands, grasslands, and other land uses. We appeal to all nations to develop and implement, without delay, effective and fair policies to reduce the causes and impacts of climate change on communities and ecosystems, including mountain glaciers and their watersheds, aware that we all live in the same home. By acting now, in the spirit of common but differentiated responsibility, we accept our duty to one another and to the stewardship of a planet blessed with the gift of life. We are committed to ensuring that all inhabitants of this planet receive their daily bread, fresh air to breathe and clean water to drink as we are aware that, if we want justice and peace, we must protect the habitat that sustains us. The believers among us ask God to grant us this wish.

The bumpersticker version of the Vatican plea for climate action: Pray for science.
Humanity’s only hope is if we listen to what the science tells us is happening now and what is likely to happen if we stay anywhere near our current emissions path. As the AP put it:

A Vatican-appointed panel of scientists has reported what climate change experts have been warning for years: the Earth is getting warmer, glaciers are melting, and urgent measures are necessary to stem the damage.

Precisely. I suppose it is an open question as to whether anybody who doesn’t accept science — presumably the same people who ignore what their medical doctors say — will listen to the Vatican. But humanity’s conscious decision-in-the-making to ignore science and thereby needlessly ruin the lives of billions of people in the coming decades is certainly one of the greatest moral issues in history, so the Vatican’s voice is certain welcome.
Here are some excerpts from the “Report by the Working Group Commissioned by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences“:

Anthropocene: Aggressive exploitation of fossil fuels and other natural resources has damaged the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we inhabit. To give one example, some 1000 billion tons of carbon dioxide and other climatically important “greenhouse” gases have been pumped into the atmosphere. As a result, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air now exceeds the highest levels of the last 800,000 years. The climatic and ecological impacts of this human interference with the Earth System are expected to last for many millennia, warranting a new name, The Anthropocene, for the new “man-made” geologic epoch we are living in.

The word anthropocene “was coined in 2000 by the Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen,” who co-chaired the distinguished group of international scientists that put together this report. Still, it’s nice to see the panel and the Vatican embrace the term.

Perspective on Past Changes: In response to the argument that “since the Earth has experienced alternating cold periods (ice ages or glacials) and warm periods (inter-glacials) during the past, today’s climate and ice cover changes are entirely natural events”, we state:
The primary triggers for ice ages and inter-glacials are well understood to be changes in the astronomical parameters related to the motion of our planet within the solar system and natural feedback processes in the climate system. The time scales between these triggers are in the range of 10,000 years or longer. By contrast, the observed human-induced changes in carbon dioxide, other greenhouse gases, and soot concentrations are taking place on 10-100 year timescales -at least a hundred times as fast. It is particularly worrying that this release of global warming agents is occurring during an interglacial period when the Earth was already at a natural temperature maximum.

Since a sustainable future based on the continued extraction of coal, oil and gas in the “business-as-usual mode” will not be possible because of both resource depletion and environmental damages (as caused, e.g., by dangerous sea level rise) we urge our societies to:
I. Reduce worldwide carbon dioxide emissions without delay, using all means possible to meet ambitious international global warming targets and ensure the long-term stability of the climate system. All nations must focus on a rapid transition to renewable energy sources and other strategies to reduce CO2 emissions. Nations should also avoid removal of carbon sinks by stopping deforestation, and should strengthen carbon sinks by reforestation of degraded lands. They also need to develop and deploy technologies that draw down excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. These actions must be accomplished within a few decades.
II. Reduce the concentrations of warming air pollutants (dark soot, methane, lower atmosphere ozone, and hydrofluorocarbons) by as much as 50%, to slow down climate change during this century while preventing millions of premature deaths from respiratory disease and millions of tons of crop damages every year.
III. Prepare to adapt to the climatic changes, both chronic and abrupt, that society will be unable to mitigate. In particular, we call for a global capacity-building initiative to assess the natural and social impacts of climate change in mountain systems and related watersheds.
The cost of the three recommended measures pales in comparison to the price the world will pay if we fail to act now.

The rest of the report is a brief review of the science...

Source: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/

Keystone XL Pipeline Tar Sands Protest

November 6, 2011 in Washington, DC.

Over 2000 have committed to be there.  The goal is to try and have enough protestors to encircle the White House and show President Obama that the tar sands belongs in the ground - forever. 

Would be nice to have a big crowd from Texas. 

Hope to see you there. . .

It's not Just about the Polar Bears

It's about Extinction...

The Earth has gone through several extinctions throughout its existence. The most well known extinction that probably everyone has heard about is the extinction of the dinosaurs. Today, probably more than ever, scientists are trying to figure out what happened during - the Permian-Triassic extinction event. The Permian-Triassic extinction happened over 251 million years ago, and was the largest extinction our planet has ever known. Aka The Great Dying and the "mother of all extinctions". This event successfully terminated 96 percent of all life on our little blue planet.

Why are scientists so interested in this event today? Because the same climate and environmental characteristics that were responsible for the planets extinction then, are beginning to become present in our atmosphere today. .
You can read about this more online, but one of the things that really worries scientists is a greenhouse gas called methane. This gas was in overabundance during the Permian-Triassic extinction as it was released from the sea floor into the atmosphere.

This same methane is beginning to make itself known today in our own atmosphere and is slowly and dangerously increasing. NOAA is so concerned with the prevalence of methane and carbon dioxide, that they track and graph these gasses on their website for anyone to see.

Where is the methane coming from? The melting Arctic. For millions of years the methane has been trapped safely in ice underneath the Arctic, but as the Arctic ice recedes, methane begins to escape through the sea floor and into the lower atmosphere.

Methane works with carbon dioxide to create a perfect soup of warming greenhouse gasses making our planet hotter, more arid, and eventually unlivable. Methane actually SPEEDS warming to create a positive warming feedback loop that once started, is unstoppable. The only way to stop it is to not let it begin in the first place, but unfortunately it has already begun.

The warming of the Arctic is the final chapter for life. If Africa was where life began, then the Arctic is where life will end. While our planet warms and big oil now gets the privilege to drill in the Arctic waters and make their billions, methane is being released at what soon will be an unstoppable rate. While the Permian-Triassic event was a naturally occurring event, ours is human-made, and We are creating the next Permian-Triassic extinction event. Reading about the Permian-Triassic extinction event is like reading about climate change gone terribly wrong, and now we have decided to continue the next chapter.

Those who make up myths about climate denial are the true American Psychos. They are the most unethical, corrupt and dangerous group around because they spread seeds of doubt in the name of wealth and power and influence. Run-of-the-mill everyday folks can't wrap their minds around the idea that some people are so evil that they would destroy the planet just in the name of money - that's it.

What you don't realize is that you and your children are going to be alive at the same time witnessing the agony of a dying planet and the agony of each other. We are that close to our own destruction, and probably the saddest part of all is that...

We could have stopped it, but didn't.

ExxonMobil Affirms Climate Change is Real

If actions speak louder than words - Exxon has just spoken volumes. A recent New York Times story has reported that Exxon will now begin to explore and drill for oil in the Arctic. This is an enormous investment in the quest for new oil reserves that will mean billions for Russia and Exxon. Even the Russian Prime Minister, Alexander Putin was quoted as saying, "The scale of the investment is very large. It's scary to utter such figures."

The Arctic waters had once been viewed as a hopeless place to drill for oil because the area has been covered by ice 9 months out of the year. What has happened now that oil companies are investing big bucks to search and drill? The area is now warming and the ice is receding, making it possible to maneuver and search for oil. This is huge regarding climate change because climate deniers have said over and over that the Arctic will cool and adjust back to the 1970's levels. The climate scientists who are in the know realize that the Arctic is warming and will be that way for a long time. I guess we know who Exxon is really listening to.

Texas based Exxon has paid untold amounts to lobby against climate change and to assert lies that warming and climate change is not happening because they stand to be the losers on the other side of the issue. However, if they win, it means billions in the process for them and more dirty oil, dirty air, and dirty politicians for us.

So if a politician spouts off about having doubts about climate change, you can bet they've been lobbied by big oil to assert those positions.

Exxon knows that warming is here to stay. So do the politicians, but they've been paid to keep their mouths shut.

Enjoy these warm temperatures Texas. They are going to be around for a long long time.

Global Warming or Climate Change?

It's the same thing.

Climate Change has become a more common usage because the general public was becoming confused by the term Global Warming.

Yes, it still gets cold.

Yes, it still snows.

So people get confused...

The term "Climate Change", seems to be a little clearer in relating the fact that OVERALL, in the LONG run, our planet is warming and our weather is becoming more extreme as we continue to burn fossil fuels.

Scientists aren't conspiring to try and trick the general public. Just the opposite - they are trying to make the issue clearer.

Deniers, and the skeptics who take their word for it, have attacked and distorted the usage to confuse the public.

Save the Babies. Kill the Planet.

Joel 1: 17-20

What does it mean if the great natural disasters that are happening in Texas don't go away? Who is to blame? Is God trying to tell us something?

Pastor Hagee insinuated that hurricane Katrina was sent to New Orleans because they had an inordinate amount of sinners. After all, Pastor Hagee said, Katrina hit New Orleans the same day a gay parade was scheduled. So what are we to believe about the record drought, extreme heat, and the millions of acres of wildfires that have destroyed Texas' farms and ranches? Who do we blame? Who's the big sinner to blame for these natural disasters? Aren't christians everywhere praying for rain? Why isn't God answering their prayers? Are there no more devout people in Texas?

What if God, this time, is actually taking sides on this argument? What if God believes that we the people, the caretakers of this planet, are to blame for our destruction of it? What if God knows that answering millions of prayers for rain would be like giving permission to just continue with business as usual. It would be like rewarding bad behavior. What if this is a permanent weather pattern that we have created ( or God is allowing) because we have refused to care for our planet?

Even scarier, what if the climate scientists are right? What if they are the modern prophets of our time - not the preachers who spout that they think they know when the End is going to be?
Maybe God is angry with us for polluting His planet. Maybe God is not going to answer your prayers for rain and relief from drought.

Mr. Perry is discounting scientists who warn that global warming is caused by human activity because Perry believes they receive funding and grants only if they support climate change. But who is paying you, Mr. Perry, to say that you don't believe in global warming? How much oil money and big business money do you receive to spout your own beliefs about global warming? I think quite a bit...

So what good is it if we save all the babies from abortions, shut down all the Planned Parenthood facilities, but kill the planet we live on? What future is that for the "unborn"?
Sent

Big Tobacco & Global Warming

Professional Deniers from the well funded think tanks for Global Warming are using the same techniques the Tobacco Industries have used in sowing seeds of doubt among the general public. Tobacco wanted us to doubt the harmful effects of smoking; Global Warming Deniers want us to doubt the harmfulness of burning greenhouse gases. Both of these groups are tied together in how they use the science and scientists to spread doubt. Frederick Seitz was one of the leading figures in helping give birth to this movement of doubt.

"Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the "body of fact" that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of causing a controversy." ~tobacco company memo quoted in Original "Doubt is our product..."memo" University of California, San Francisco. 21 August 1969. Retrieved March 2010


"They patterned what they did after the tobacco industry. [...] Both figured, sow enough doubt, call the science uncertain and in dispute. That's had a big impact on Congress." ~Time Wirth former U.S. Senator from Colorado

Better yet, find a well pedigreed scientist like Dr. Frederick Seitz who was a former National Academy of Sciences president, but was also willing to put his science to work for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and make statements about smoking like this one: "there is no good scientific evidence that passive inhalation is truly dangerous under normal circumstances". Steiz stood against the scientific consensus that smoking was dangerous to people's health and helped to create confusion and doubt on the issue.

Seitz was also willing to downplay Global Warming, and those journalists who were also skeptics, would often quote Dr. Seitz and his findings in their newspaper or magazine articles. The United States National Academy of Sciences would refute his position on Global Warming, which was very extraordinary, given the fact that he was one of the Academy's former presidents.

U.S. Representative Rush Holt of New Jersey's 12th Congressional district who is a Physicist, Professor, and Quaker told Newsweek magazine:

"...for more than two decades scientists have been issuing warnings that the release of greenhouse gases, principally (CO2), is probably altering the Earth's climate in ways that will be expensive and even deadly. The American public yawned and bought bigger cars. Statements by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Geophysical Union, American Meteorological Society, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and others underscored the warnings and called for new government policies to deal with climate change. Politicians, presented with noisy statistics, shrugged, said there is too much doubt among scientists, and did nothing."

If it worked for Big Tobacco...
Deny
Deny
Deny
Deny

occupywallstreet

The "Let them eat cake" atttitude of the bankers, government and top 1% in our country is turning against them into a Revolution. We watched while the shit heads on high had their big bailouts and big big profits and big government handouts while the other 99% got higher interest rates on their credit cards, home foreclosures, and unemployment.

We all watched how our government refused to pay it's own debt, and faced default, manufacturing its own governmental crisis, while ignoring the fact that the real crisis is that millions of people are looking for jobs because the big businesses "job creators" had shipped our jobs overseas, and every day we get to hear how these great "job creators" have trillions in the bank, yet they sit on mountains of cash, waiting for the next big investment overseas, while the truest and most meaningful investement should be in the expanding their businesses here in the United States.

We get to hear how the "rich" are the only ones who create jobs and deserve special monetary favors and loopholes, not mentioning that one of the great entreprenuers of our time, Steve Jobs, started Apple Computer out of his garage.

We get to hear how these greedy bastards don't want to pay taxes, and how Warren Buffet pays less in taxes than his secretary. We hear how Congress day in and day out fights to not allow tax increases on those making over $250,000 a year, but they try to scare the American public into thinking that our President wants to raise taxes on us all.

We get to hear how the top 10 oil compaines made almost a trillion dollars over the last decade, yet we still subsidize them with our own taxpayer money.

We get to hear how JP Morgan Chase just donated $4.1 million to the NYPD police department, right before the occupywallstreet demonstraters were to march on their bank, only to have many of the peaceful protestors maced, handcuffed and imprisioned. It's a sad day, when a bank can bribe a police department to halt our First Amendment rights.

It's time for our government to be pro-people, not pro-business. It's time for those in our government to do what we cannot do for ourselves: protect our jobs, protect our wages, protect our Social Security, protect our health, protect our water, protect our air and stand up against those who are enriching themselves at the expense of the other 99%. We are the people you have been ignoring - so until you decide to pay attention to us - welcome to our Spring. We won't stop. . .

ExxonMobil & Al Gore

Classic climate change denier chatter from time to time includes attacks on Al Gore...

Here's the thing though - Al Gore is NOT A CLIMATE SCIENTIST. He is not a scientific authority on climate change. I have never heard a legitimate climate scientist quote AL Gore in a peer reviewed article on climate change.

The reason why I (myself) BELIEVE the science behind the reality of climate change is NOT because of Al Gore. It is because of good peer reviewed articles on our changing climate investigated by real scientists and published by real scientific agencies.

If you don't want to believe in what Al Gore says, fine. Maybe Al Gore does make a lot of money off of his messages and speeches about global warming and climate change. If that makes him disingenuous to you, ok. But be careful going down that road, because that road goes both ways.

ExxonMobil is one of the biggest funders of climate change Deniers and Think Tanks in trying to destroy the validity of scientific facts behind our changing climate. If you are going to be suspicious of Al Gore and his messages on global warming because of how much money he makes, then how much more suspicious should you be of the Denier messages of the super rich corporation ExxonMobil? I know Al Gore is wealthy, but hell, he's a pauper in comparison to ExxonMobil (see data below).

Year ExxonMobil Net Income in Billions
2005 $36.1
2006 $39.5
2007 $40.6
2008 $45.2

Sources: ExxonMobil; Securities Exchange Commission

I think ExxonMobil has a little more to lose in the Climate Change/Global Warming debate than that mean ol' Noble Peace Prize winning Al Gore.

Besides, in the end, this is not about Al Gore; it's about the science behind climate change.  Attacking Al Gore is a classic denier technique. 

Consider the following argument by Mark Hoofnagle:
These arguments, while emotionally appealing, have no impact on the validity of the science.
It is important to filter information so that scientific discourse and debate can stay within the confines of rational argument and reason. Otherwise we get sidetracked and paralysed by denialists who are not honest brokers in a debate. Their goal isn't to promote science, or truth, or human knowledge, but to delay and deny.
 
Mark Hoofnagle has a PhD in physiology from the University of Virginia and contributes to denialism blog.

Method of a Climate Change Denier

Those who create false claims about Climate Change are clever, brilliant, and especially good at being able to make someone doubt or just plain not believe that the extremely forceful and destructive powers of our weather could NOT ever be caused by Climate Change. The way the Deniers are able to sow seeds of doubt among the general public is as skillful as a Magicians sleight of hand - except a professional Climate Change Denier's sleight of hand is done with words. Now you see it - Now you don't. Was that real, or just a clever way of making you think it's real? Magicians will go to great extremes to keep their secrets hidden so that the ways in which their tricks are done will not be revealed to the public. After all, if we all knew how a magician performed their tricks and made things disappear, or levitate, or how they walked on water, it just wouldn't be as interesting. Actually, a Magicians tricks are fairly simple - you look at one hand but the trick is being performed with the other hand. The Magician practices and practices until the trick is flawless and objects seem like they can "disappear". In fact, once the trick is known, even a child could perform it and wow their parents and friends with their newly acquired skill at making things disappear.

A Climate Change Denier's tricks are so clever, that just viewing their arguments from an audiences standpoint would make one believe that what they are saying is true i.e.: Climate Change is a myth. It is not real. It is a disappearing reality conjured up by the mean and wicked scientists. What is so clever about the professional Climate Change Denier's tricks is that what they say is TRUE, but the other side of the coin is that even though the statements they make about Climate Change might be true, it's not accurate. Here is one great secret in getting someone to doubt what they believe - STATE A TRUE AND KNOWN FACT FIRST. Let me repeat, if you want to sow seeds of doubt - STATE A TRUE AND KNOWN FACT FIRST. This is the main trick of a professional Climate Science Denier. Remember, follow the formula: STATE A TRUE AND KNOWN FACT FIRST.

Look at some of the well known professional Climate Science Denier's attacking statements on Climate Change:
1. Climate's changed in the past (True but False)
2. Antarctica is gaining ice (True but False)
3. It's not bad (True but False)
4. Not all scientists agree (True but False)
5. Climate models are not reliable (True but False)
6. It's getting colder (True but False)
7. Even if it does get warmer, life on our planet will adapt (True but False)
8. Volcanoes cause Climate Change. (True but False)
9. The planet is too big for humans to cause the climate to change (True but False)


There are more statement's like these, and if you are someone who believes in Climate Change, you have probably heard these arguments from those who are skeptics. The "skeptics" are the children who have picked up the Magicians tricks and are spreading the seeds of doubt wherever they go. What is also clever about these statements is that they are easy to remember and so blatantly true that there really seems like there is no explanation needed to defend why these statements are true. A child could repeat these, no problem, and most anyone would believe. Even the news commentators can be dumped into the children category, and are especially good at getting the word out on Climate Change Denial because they have a widespread audience.

What is especially clever about these statements is that a scientist, who knows that these statements are true, must now EXPLAIN why these statements are FALSE. It really is brilliant how the professional Climate Change Denier constructed such a brilliant web of TRUTHS to disguise what is actually FALSE. So a climate scientist must now say, Yes that's true, but. . . And the devil gets lost in all the details because the science behind Climate Change is really not all that exciting and given the short attention span of the general public, will not sit long enough to hear a boring explanation on (yawn) science. So the professional Climate Change Denier wins again. It's so simple that even a child could repeat their arguments. Meanwhile, scientists get caught up behind all of the mundane details of the science behind why what was TRUE is now False and blah blah blah - Who gives a shit.

Even worse, the general public who would like to defend Climate Change, has a difficult task ahead because their explanations must be scientific and detailed... and that really is difficult unless your a scientist who studies such things, or you are just a geek who has a knack for facts and figures and such (but who would listen to that person?). So defending Climate Change is difficult for scientists and difficult for joe public. Check off another victory for the professional Climate Change Denier - even a child could do it...

Being a scientist is not easy. In a scientist world, before a statement becomes a "fact" it must undergo the scrutiny of the Scientific Method: ask a question, do background research, construct a Hypothesis, test your hypothesis by doing an experiement, analyze your data and draw a conclusion, communicate your results. It is a painstaking and excruciating process to go through. The scientist may travel to remote parts of the planet, live in extremely difficult and uncomfortable conditions to get the data they neeed for their hypothesis.

On the other hand, those who "DENY' for a living, don't go through this process. The professional Deniers probably work in a nice climate controlled office, get paid a nice salary, and think long and hard on what their next true lie is going to be. True lies probably get passed around the nice mahogony table in the really nice plush office with the big tall comfy leather chairs to other professional Deniers. When they think of the next big True Lie they give each other high fives and pats on the back and begin feeding the true lies to the public. They communicate doubt, and by so doing undermine the whole process that the climate scientist went through to get their results.

So the purpose of this writing has been to explain how a professional Climate Change Denier works. I'm not going to defend the skeptical statements above, because that's not the purpose of this writing. Look for the answers yourself, but I'm warning you, some of the answers are long and boring. Now I'm going to get off topic and write one more thing:

Someone up high needs to pay attention to what's going on. Someone, who can make a difference, needs to embrace what is happening to our planet, embrace the science behind Climate Change, show some courage and lead us to a more sustainable and livable planet. I'm talking about our Congress. I'm talking about our President. I'm talking about our local and state governments. I don't care what your party affiliation is, just start doing something about it.

Thanks for reading. . .

Vatican Affirms Climate Change is Real‏

To all my Catholic friends,

The statement from the Vatican is below:


We call on all people and nations to recognise the serious and potentially irreversible impacts of global warming caused by the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants, and by changes in forests, wetlands, grasslands, and other land uses. We appeal to all nations to develop and implement, without delay, effective and fair policies to reduce the causes and impacts of climate change on communities and ecosystems, including mountain glaciers and their watersheds, aware that we all live in the same home. By acting now, in the spirit of common but differentiated responsibility, we accept our duty to one another and to the stewardship of a planet blessed with the gift of life. We are committed to ensuring that all inhabitants of this planet receive their daily bread, fresh air to breathe and clean water to drink as we are aware that, if we want justice and peace, we must protect the habitat that sustains us. The believers among us ask God to grant us this wish.