Liberty
Matters News Service
November 21, 2007
It's a SCAM
"It is the greatest scam in history. Global Warming; it is a SCAM." That is what John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel said in an article for the publication, ICECAP, recently. "Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific date to create an illusion of rapid global warming [and were rewarded by their government pals with] huge research grants to keep the movement going." Coleman continued, "Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and liberal environmentalist journalists to create this wild 'scientific' scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda." Mr. Coleman said he had read dozens of scientific papers and talked with numerous scientists about the issue and his research led him to conclude; "There is no runaway climate change. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed," he continued, "by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming [Al Gore]." Dr. William Gray, pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, was equally scornful of the Global Warming hysteria. The same day that Al Gore received his Nobel Peace Prize for his monumental work of science fiction, "An Inconvenient Truth," Dr. Gray told a crowd of meteorology students and professional meteorologists the global warming theory is "ridiculous." "We're brainwashing our children," Dr. Gray said. "They're going to the Gore movie and being fed all this. It's ridiculous." Dr. Gray poked holes in alarmists' claims that hurricanes are increasing because of the climate change, citing statistics showing there were 101 hurricanes from 1900 to 1949 during a period of cool temperatures and 83 from 1957 to 2006 when the earth was warmer. "The human impact on the atmosphere is simply too small to have a major effect on global temperatures," he said. Dr. Gray expressed disappointment that his fellow scientists have failed to speak against something they know is wrong. "But they also know that they'd never get any grants if they spoke out." John Stossel, ABC's only conservative thinker, in a November 14 article; "Don't Look to Government to Cool Down the Planet," said although the media insist that the "science is in" and the "debate is over," it isn't. "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) may present a 'consensus view of scientists' but the 'consensus' is not without dissent. Consensus is the stuff of politics, not science," says Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute. John Christy, director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama, notes that no amount of government tinkering will make any difference in the climate. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Christy said; "Suppose you are very serious about making a dent in carbon emissions and could replace about 10 percent of the world's energy sources with non-CO2-emitting nuclear power by 2020 - roughly equivalent to halving U.S. emissions. Based on IPCC-like projections, the required 1,000 new nuclear power plants would slow the warming by about 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit per century. It's a dent."
Weather Channel Founder: Global
Warming "Greatest Scam in History
Gore
Gets a Cold Shoulder
No One Can Agree
The American people want the laws of the land enforced; something the Bush administration is unwilling to do along the U.S./Mexico border. The border has become a nightmare for the citizens there, and law enforcement agencies that are stretched to the limit trying to keep drug smugglers from taking over and attempting to slow the flood of illegal alien traffic. Last year President Bush, under pressure, signed legislation to build a 700-mile fence. Not much fence has been built, but opposition is growing even though no one knows for sure where it will go. Residents along the Rio Grande River in Texas have been told the fence may be built as much as two miles from the river on the U.S. side. In the small town of Granjeno, population 400, life-long residents fear the fence may destroy their homes. No one seems to be able to find out what is in store for the mostly corn-growing region. J.D. Salinas, Hidalgo County official, says he can't get any straight answers from the government. "Are we going to lose prime farmland because they are going to build a structure that's not going to work? You're moving the border, basically two miles. You're giving it to Mexico, and the U. S. Mexico treaties say you are not supposed to do that," Salinas argued. Six Texas border mayors believe widening the river would be a better solution. Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada says the project would cost $40 million. "A widened river would be a bigger deterrent to illegal immigration and the project doesn't send the wrong message to Mexico that the wall does," he said. "The big question is whether the plan falls within the language of that law [the Secure Fence Act]. We believe it does," said Eagle Pass mayor Chad Foster. In the meantime, President Bush has asked for $500 million, with more installments to come, to provide military equipment and support to Mexico for its war on drug dealers. The price tag would eventually total $1.5 billion. Texas Democrat Henry Cuellar, who embarrassed himself on CNN's Glen Beck show in an arrogant exchange with Texas Webb County Sheriff Rick Flores, has introduced legislation to further assist Mexico. H.R. 502 amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, to authorize assistance, improve security, and promote economic development in Mexico. In the meantime, Congress and the president continue to look for ways to keep the borders open and the flow of illegal aliens and drugs moving unimpeded by failing to adequately fund border Sheriff departments that are struggling to hold the line.
Texas Mayors Want Wider Rio
Grande
US Military Headed Next for
Mexican Soil?
Glenn Beck Program: Boiling
Point
Bush Stonewalls on Mexican
Military Aid
Grand Theft
The thieves didn't wear black masks, but one wore a black robe. Boulder, Colorado resident, Don Kirlin has had a portion of his property taken from him and given to a retired Boulder judge in a strange "adverse possession" land dispute. The property in question is two residential lots that Kirlin and his wife have owned since the 1980s. They never built on the property, but they paid $16,000 in taxes every year and kept up the maintenance. Kirlin's neighbor, retired judge Richard McLean, was awarded 34 percent of the property by his pal Judge James Klein, who bought McLean's story that the land was his because he had used it for 18 years without permission and without objection. The Kirlins were unaware the judge had designs on their place until tipped off by a neighbor. They dismissed the idea and went ahead with a fence-building project. That is when McLean confronted the contractor and told him to cease. McLean claimed he had worn a twenty-foot path onto Kirlin's property, which entitled him to possess it. Kirlin said the claims were suspect and that were no pictures supporting McLean's statements. Nonetheless, Judge Klein determined McLean had a "stronger" attachment to the property and awarded him about 1,500 square feet of the parcel, estimated to be worth $800,000 to $1 million in the exclusive Boulder subdivision. The fight cost Kirlin $120,000, (he plans to appeal), but now McLean wants court costs too. "Under a best case scenario, if we appeal, and we get back the land we already owned, it will cost us $200,000 and it will take us three years," Kirlin said.
Retired Judge: This Land Is My Land
Road to the Dark Ages
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Sen. John Warner (RINO-VA) have introduced legislation to curb green house gas emissions. S. 2191, America's Climate Security Act, requires companies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions to 2005 levels by 2012 and 1990 levels by 2020. It would require a 65 percent reduction in those gases from 1990 levels by 2050. CRA International, a respected business consultant firm, estimates the Lieberman-Warner bill will cost $4 to $6 trillion over 40 years. Dr. Margo Thorning, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist for the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Hearings that S. 2191 would cause "higher energy prices, lost jobs and reduced [gross domestic product]." Even Sen. Lieberman admitted that the bill was bad. "It's hard to imagine that [Lieberman-Warner] will not cost - over time - these two sectors (electric power and industrial), hundreds of billions of dollars to comply with the demands of this bill." Sen. James Inhofe, (R-OK), Ranking Member of Environment & Public Works Committee said; "The Lieberman-Warner bill will burden American families with additional energy costs and significantly harm the United States economy." Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan noted in his new book, The Age of Turbulence: "There is no effective way to meaningfully reduce emissions without negatively impacting a large part of an economy. Net, it is a tax," Greenspan wrote. Inhofe further criticized supporters by saying the process looks like window dressing to impress the attendees of a United Nations meeting in Bali in December. But Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, spoke in favor of the bill. "We would never leave a child alone in a hot, locked car, and I believe the [committee] will not leave this issue of global warming burning for another generation to address," Boxer said. Despite overwhelming opposition to S 2191, it passed the subcommittee by a vote of 4-3. Supporters hope to push it through the Committee [EPW] on December 5, and then on to the Senate floor.