Facts are cooling off climate alarmism

It’s an inconvenient time for world leaders to be speechifying about global warming — earlier this week at the United Nations, today and tomorrow at a G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh. The supposed certainty behind their push for new eco-regulation is melting faster than the Arctic ice.

Global temperatures have held steady for several years, contrary to the expectations of statistical models. This month, a leading German user of these climate models predicted temperatures would fall for “one or two decades” to come.

Why the reprieve? The German, Mojib Latif, cited changing currents in the northern Atlantic Ocean. He even went a step further, saying the currents were also responsible for an unknown portion of the warming in the late 20th century.

Perhaps sensing that a future filled with research grants was about to go up in smoke, Latif hastened to clarify that 20 years of cooling would not mean “global warming [was] disappearing.”

But of course. Only someone in Latif’s line of work would make such a confident prediction about the effects of his very own prediction.

In fact, the value of Latif’s work lies in the uncertainties.

The German seriously undercut the idea that global warming will continue unabated as long as emissions of carbon dioxide rise, a cherished claim of climate alarmists. Nature, he acknowledged, can overwhelm or amplify whatever heating effect CO2 has. We’re still learning how.

There’s more. Writing in the journal Science, a group of scientists has offered a new explanation of how the sun affects the Pacific climate system.

Climate models missed this effect, the scientists said, because they accounted for two different climate mechanisms separately. But the two may work together.

Climate models have missed a lot, including the recent plateauing of temperatures. As with any crystal ball, the people who use them might accurately forecast the future. Or they might not.

The hubris of climate modeling may have been summarized best by Vicky Pope of Britain’s weather authority, the Met Office. “In many ways,” she said at the same conference where Latif made his remarks, “we know more about what will happen in the 2050s than next year.”

Pope was trying to reaffirm confidence in climate modeling, but her comment would have been better delivered with tongue in cheek. Is there any other subject where we claim to know more about what will happen in the distant future than in the near future?

There are limits to the models that climatologists use with supreme confidence. Climate alarmists are trying to be like the one-armed economist that Harry Truman wished for — one who wouldn’t counter his own opinion by saying, “On the other hand …”

When predicting the future, there’s always another hand.

Now, the Earth’s climate may well change for the worse regardless of what we do. There is a good case to be made for trying to avoid the worst consequences.

But the way to do that is not to regulate our economies to a halt. Instead, we should work to solve problems that might worsen if the atmosphere gets warmer for whatever reason. Adaptation has always been man’s best bet.

This approach has been the very logical campaign of Danish professor Bjorn Lomborg. His Copenhagen Consensus Center periodically enlists top-flight economists to review the cost-effectiveness of proposals that would be beneficial come warming or cooling.

The top priority from the 2008 exercise was increasing poor children’s intake of vitamin A and zinc. Investing in R&D for low-carbon technology ranked 14th out of 30 options — about where it deserves to be.

If only the world leaders in Pittsburgh this week would take such a tack. But that would mean they had forgone granting new regulatory power to themselves.

In other words, don’t hold your exhalation of CO2.

Note: Commenting is closed on this entry.

130 comments Add your comment

godless heathen

September 23rd, 2009
9:18 pm

Now, now Kyle, don’t be throwing water on the dreams of those that are positioned to make mega-bucks off of “Climate Change”. Like GE (owner of NBC and Barack Obama) and various companies that Al Gore is invested in.

Art at Large

September 23rd, 2009
9:26 pm

Yet another republican who says that global warming is not a danger, a threat, or a possibility.
Mankind can, you say, adapt to living on a ruined planet, although that is not exactly how YOU put it.
If mankind can adapt to rising sea levels, more severe weather events that occur more often, and the demolition of the food chain due to mass extinctions, why couldn’t man adapt in a much more positive way?
Mankind could adapt to living with energy sources other than fossil fuels like gas and coal. We could adapt to ending the destruction of the rain forest as it is cut and burned down to provide grazing areas for cattle destined to become McDonald’s hamburger patties. We could adapt to halting mountain-top removal in the search for the dirtiest energy resource we currently have, coal.
We could adapt to raising windmill farms, photo-voltaic farms, and we could anchor buoys offshore that use the kinetic energy of waves to generate electricity.
Know where else we could adapt? We could finally look beyond the ends of our noses, or beyond our wallets, in an effort to NOT HAVE TO adapt to a ruined planet.
You are just another in a long line of conservatives who whine about the projected economic cost of preventing global warming, but you seem to have no thought or clue or intention to consider the economic costs of a ruined planet where wars will be fought over natural resources like water and arable farmland. Not a word about the cost of food riots, massive droughts that re-create the Dust Bowl of the 1930’s, or about the millions of children, elderly, impoverished, and simply unfortunate people who will die of disease, starvation, dehydration, and war.
What will happen to your Almighty Dollar then? Granted, there will be massive profits to be made in both legitimate and black markets selling water, food, guns, and the like…survival tools.
But you are instead willing to consign millions to the mass grave of history just because YOU happen to think that controlling global warming will be too expensive. You want EXPENSIVE?
Go ahead and cheer for the destruction of the planet instead.
See what that gets you, you fool.

warmhandcoldheart

September 23rd, 2009
9:46 pm

Suppose global warming or global cooling were caused by man. Which it isn’t. How does putting a tax on just about everything help solve the problem? I want to see Al Gore do a remake of his cartoon movie. This time with his teeth chattering as he is explaining how the ice cap is still melting even though the temperatures have dropped four degrees.

warmhandcoldheart

September 23rd, 2009
9:51 pm

Hey Art at Large. Answer…..One nuclear power plant and we don’t need the windmills and tidal wave generators.

David Axelfraud

September 23rd, 2009
10:11 pm

As a native Chicagoan, I welcome global warming. I want it to be hot instead of it being 7 below zero in December. I always make fun of green peace idiots out on Michigan Ave who want to have a conversation about global warming while wiping frozen snot off their pale skinny chain smoking faces.

Tall

September 23rd, 2009
10:14 pm

Art at Large: Broadcasting invective like that generates a lot of CO2. What if all of this really is caused by sunspot activity? I think you’re just a shill for one of the AJC editorial board members.

Tall

September 23rd, 2009
10:18 pm

David:

I used to have clients in Chicago and Milwaukee and I always called on them in late January or early February. There was never any competition for there attention at that time of year. I always stayed at the Tremont Hotel. One year, I took a walk down to Lake Michigan in 0 degree weather. Chicago really is a nice place to visit, but…..

Casey

September 23rd, 2009
10:21 pm

Even with the assumption that global warming is not man-made, and even that global warming doesn’t exist at all, it is a good idea for mankind to find any way possible to stop burning up non-renewable resources. We’re going to run out of oil and coal eventually, so we might as well make the switch to cleaner renewable energies now.

David Axelfraud

September 23rd, 2009
10:24 pm

Tall, Chicago is a nice place to live if you can get past the corruption, high taxes and crazy liberals. The winters are annoyingly long and can be brutal. It gets old after the first 6 months of winter.

Richard

September 23rd, 2009
10:32 pm

This might be the dumbest argument in history and a prime example of how politicians have lost sight of reality.

Who cares if global warming is man made or not? Why not just stop putting TOXIC gases into our air supply?

Hillbilly Deluxe

September 24th, 2009
12:35 am

I have no problem with trying to make the world a cleaner place. If you want to cut CO2 emissions, fine. Pass standards, enforce them, fine those who don’t comply. No one has yet made me understand why we need to create a new cap and trade industry where some people can get rich shuffling paper that basically does nothing. You’d think the fianancial meltdown would have taught us a thing or two about that. I see cap and trade as nothing more than a way for some people to buy their way out of compliance and for some others to make big bucks doing it.

Seems to me they’ve come up with a complicated solution for a simple problem. You want to cut emissions, cut emissions.

And I agree we need to find a renewable source of energy. Even if the entire center of the earth were nothing but oil, it would still run out someday. That’s the definiton of a finite resource.

HSR0601

September 24th, 2009
2:37 am

= The sky in Beijing & climate change =

We need to siege the last chance for economic growth !!

1. About two thirds of deficit in the U.S. accrue from oil import.
In this economy, fuel price is hovering around $65 to $75 a barrel, which highlights the actual value might be much the same as the peak price last year, and it will continue to spiral up unquestionably.

2. As with “Inaction” cost, $9trillion over the next decade in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, supposedly the same is of inaction on the 21st energy bill to determine war & peace, catastrophe & prosperity. For the global economy to reign in the runaway price of fossil fuels, “Sustainable Option” will be indispensable.

3. Looking to worthless, painful and wasteful oil wars, namely, the “Original Source” of this great recession, to waste time bickering over meaningless things and drag feet on a defining energy bill are sure to shake the embryonic effect of stimulus package that is an interim measure for build-out of a new foundation.

4. As the overall oil reserve in Middle East, let alone the rest of oil-producing areas, is on the decline more than known, the region blessed with affluent sun rays also needs to ready for a new groundwork, particularly in this context AEU is beginning to concentrate on future energy and Iranian EV is rolling out recently, the countries in the region will never stand still on the occupation, that means no matter what the result is, the repetitious mistake at the cost of invaluable lives and gigantic spending will end up with a heartbreaking tragedy once again.

5. Facing a sharp downturn in fossil fuels all over the world, the world-wide overpopulation growing consistently is using up tremendous fossil fuels at an alarming pace. Especially when the own conventional resources in some dense countries is facing drastic dent, it adds up explicitly.

6. For that reason, it is widely accepted that the price of fossil fuels is expected to go up and up simply, which is behind all but major states taking a bold and speedy action in a bid to put the global economy on a sustainable and solid ground.

7. Thankfully and interestingly enough, 100s of Companies (with $13 Trillion) Are Demanding Strong Climate Deal in Copenhagen just like environmental activists, a coalition of more than 500 Global Businesses is also demanding ambitious new climate deal, and the report by Blair and the Climate Group, a London-based nonprofit organization, found a climate-change accord among all countries would spur economic growth and create as many as 10 million jobs by 2020.

8. Currently, a 21st energy bill has passed the House and is making its way through Senate. According to CBO, this bill known as more progressive generally would trim budget deficit by $24.4 billion of a net gain.

9. I think the world is eagerly looking forward to Americans’ participation, and if it were not for world-wide massive job creation, the world can not pull the economy out of this recession successfully.

10. I’d say only science and innovation can meet this challenge, and the science enough for all around the globe to live in harmony is awaiting final assembly by way of innovation. It seems to me that this great recession is pitching us a serious lesson to make sure we build a bridge for future generations, otherwise, our generation, too, is falling off the cliff.

Thank You !

DeborahinAthens

September 24th, 2009
6:48 am

Kyle, when my cherry tree blooms in December we have an abnormally warm climate. Since this only started happening within the last five years, it appears that something has drastically changed. One only has to look at old family photos at certain times of the year to see how early the trees and shrubs are leafing out and blooming. And, besides, even if global warming was NOT the issue, what on earth do you have against cleaning up our environment? When you have such a high percentage of people with asthma doesn’t that tell you something? Why NOT make the utility companies clean up their stacks? Why not make cars that are more fuel efficient, simply because it makes our lives better? In the end, if we can’t breath the air or drink the water, does it matter if our corporations can make a few extra bucks?

Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST

September 24th, 2009
6:51 am

Saxby will be voting for Cap & Trade, it is full of ETHANOL subsidies and MY job depends on his vote.

Buzz G

September 24th, 2009
7:23 am

This global warming thing is the dumbest thing I have seen in my lifetime (I am old and retired). Someday our grandchildren will look back on this time and laugh at how stupid we were to believe that the earth was going to melt because of man-made CO2. The computer models that these scientists put together aren’t worth the expense. The term we used to use for computer models that were nonsense was GIGO, which stood for garbage in, garbage out. It’s funny, when Exxon funded climate change research, people jumped up and proclaimed it unreliable because Exxon money would corrupt the results. But those same people never figured out that Government money corrupts just as much as Exxon money. I suspect these researchers know that if they stood up and said there was no global warming, the government research grants would end and they would be standing in the unemployment line.

Edward

September 24th, 2009
8:05 am

I want Kyle Wingfield and all his cronies to be forced to live under a smokestack somewhere, preferably in a toxic waste dump. Let his children run around in the muck. Oh, wait, he doesn’t want that, he just wants someone else’s children to have to endure that, right? If you can’t afford to live in a nice neighborhood then, well, you don’t deserve good health and clean air, huh?

People like Wingfield, who’s goals in life are based purely on greed, will hopefully suffer because of that eventually.

Ben

September 24th, 2009
8:12 am

Is it possible that global warming exists? Yes. That it’s man-made? Maybe. That it’s natural? Maybe?

None of that really matters. We should do what we can to reduce pollution anyway, but not at the cost of our economy. We need to move slowly to change our habits, and not force new laws that destroy our economy, which many fo the global warming activists seem to want to do.

There’s a giant bloom of plastic floating in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, and another in the Atlantic. We need to stop adding to that, and figure out how to clean it up. And those are things we can do, over time, slowly but with determination. Few people are going to have a problem with reducing pollution, so long as it doesn’t adversely affect the economy and our lifestyles. And I think we can do that. What we don’t need to do is react with a bunch of new laws that create unintended consequences and destroy our economy (worse than it already is).

Churchill's MOM

September 24th, 2009
8:33 am

godless heathen
9:18 pm

GE is not getting a good return from owning Obama, he opposes GE’s 2nd Engine program for the F35. Obama says he will veto this waste of taxpayer money.

William

September 24th, 2009
8:37 am

Art at Large

September 23rd, 2009
9:26 pm
You said we have a ruined planet! Where did you get this bogus information whacko? Is this a concensus or a fact? I just saw a discussion on plantet warming by numerous scientists and we have been getting cooler according to their studies. Do you pick your studies? This study does not support my agenda so I will ignore it but this study sayS pollutants are being emitted slightly higher so I will us it for global warming. Is this how you do it? I bet you just pull up data from you speical interest groupS who provide mis-information to uphold their agenda.

Everyone wants clean water and air! But you whackos have starved an oil based economy with false information or at least unproved information in an effort to make everyone live like you want them to live. Go to H&**! I will not do that! However you have succeeded in costing the American worker billions of dollars needed to simply make ends meet. Like Joe Wilson said,” YOU LIE!”.

Churchill's MOM

September 24th, 2009
8:38 am

Wingboy, 2 good Conservative editorials in a row, I’m proud of you but when are you going to get after our RINO congressmen?

Dunwoody Mike

September 24th, 2009
9:05 am

William,
Please provide some proof for your claim. Otherwise, you are merely blowing hot air, like a smokestack.

hryder

September 24th, 2009
9:07 am

A microview of ramifications of climate alarmism has occurred with so many Chicken Littles seeking recognition as the leading authority that one does not have to do anything until another CL debunks, through scientific fact or the passing of time with no earth ending event, the pontification of the next saviour. What is necessary is the macroview of the world considering all possible slants and effects on the world’s weather and that is impossible since even an extraterrestial alien would possess bias due to bias from their source of existence and modes of communication. In short, people need to find another topic to seek recognition as “numero uno”. Which means Al Gore is and will probably always be a whining Johnny come lately second banana.

The Anti-Wooten

September 24th, 2009
9:08 am

I’ve decided not to no longer care.

An acquaintance of mine with a degree in ecology from a major university not located in the south, says that he gets miffed each time that he hears the term global warming. His contention is that it should be called “global chaos and who knows what will come next”.

Kyle asserts that changes in North Atlantic currents are responsible for recent cooling. Clearly Kyle has not been paying attention to any information other than what fits his tidy, small minded agenda. Those that are actually knowledgeable on the subject have been discussing what would happen if the thermohaline conductor currents begin to change. For those that haven’t been paying attention, here’s what could happen:

Fresh water melt alters the density of sea water in the N Atlantic and other sea zones.

The “elevators” of the ocean current system slow or stop as the density of the water changes.

Circulation of water from areas such as the Gulf of Mexico slows resulting in much warmer water in those areas and much colder waters in the N Atlantic.

New Ice Age.

Now I realize that this is only one of dozens or millions of possible scenarios but since I don’t have children, I don’t care anymore. I wish this pox upon all of your children because those of you that aren’t paying deserve it.

Me

September 24th, 2009
9:09 am

Edward:

You’re right about that. kind of reminds you of Ted Kennedy and his desire for someone else to have to endure the sight of windmills, doesn’t it?

The Anti-Wooten

September 24th, 2009
9:10 am

I’ve decided not to no longer care…yikes what was I thinking.

Should have been “I’ve decided to no longer care”.

Ben

September 24th, 2009
9:13 am

That’s the thing, Dunwoody Mike. Where’s the proof that global arming is man made and not a natural occurence? There’s no smoking gun, heck there may not even be actual warming. Show me YOUR proof before you and your like minded fellows destroy the economy and the future of humanity by crippling our energy resources.

You know what’s really expensive? Destroying the economy and killing (indirectly) millions, even billions of people, and then finding out that it wasn’t man made at all, and all our efforts and suffering were for naught.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
9:24 am

Edward, I want you to live in North Korea so that you can experience the wonderful world of communism you so truly adore.

On a better note: So much for Carville and Bookmans assertion that the GOP is dead. Morons.

Independents desert Obama, putting 2010 in play
By: Chris Stirewalt

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, the Rolls-Royce of public surveys, showed that for the first time, independents disapproved of the president’s performance, 46 percent to 41 percent.

More shocking is that independent voters now favor a Republican-controlled Congress by a four-point margin and would overwhelmingly like to see their own member of the House replaced.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
9:31 am

Kyle, when you came on board to the AJC, did it ever occur to you that Bookman and Cynthia Tucker have caused a lot of hatred for the AJC?

My point is this. Bookman and Tucker, over the last 5 years, have caused more readers to cancel their subscriptions. How do I know this? Simple, when I lived in Georgia I used to help out with newspaper deliveries when I was in school. I had a few friends who went door to door all over the metro counties trying to sell newspapers. Seven of my friends did a little experiment. What they did was keep a tally of why people canceled their subscriptions vs. people who kept them.

Out of the people who canceled their subscriptions, 250 people said that they canceled it because of Cynthia Tucker. 139 said that they canceled theirs because of Jay Bookman. And get this, 390 people canceled because of BOTH of them. Now I know that doesn’t sound like a lot of people but in my friends districts of sales, that was the entire AJC circulation of subscriptions.

Now, another interesting point: The majority of people who kept their subscriptions dropped their 7 day subscriptions and went with the weekend edition. WHY? Because they wanted the coupons. The rest of the newspaper went into the garbage can. They also complained about most of the newspaper itself being coupons and sales ads. No news.

Just thought you should know.

Bob

September 24th, 2009
9:41 am

The green angle is just that. An angle. A marketing gimmick. Another way for Obozo and his gang of socialist thugs to rape more out of the US Treasury. GE is thick like thieves with it.

And the stupid is very strong with the AJC. Bookman and Tucker post their inane “journalism”, comment with their multiple aliases, and censor the comments that prove their “journalism” wrong. Then they present the garbage as “news”. When the last Cox sister croaks the AJC will be a tax write-off the heirs will no longer play with.

pd

September 24th, 2009
9:48 am

The Global Warming issue has really clouded the overall situation.

Whether these models are correct or not, we should ALL be in agreement that we want to reduce air pollution. I don’t need any scientist to tell me that the air is polluted. I can see it clearly with the naked eye over the sky line of Atlanta.

Likewise with our rivers and streams.

Lets just all agree to try to pollute less. Buy local when possible. Avoid products with excess packaging. ect…

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
9:53 am

Bob, yep. Bookman has a very very thin skin. He was never fit for the world of journalism. It’s ok, on his blog, to make fun of Palin, Limbaugh, Bush, Reagan and other republican/conservatives but if one trashes a democrat he bans you. Bookman and Tucker are both “copy and paste” op-ed writers who rehash the same tired stories and opinions over and over again.

Bookman: I hate Sarah Palin. Rush Limbaugh is fat and is addicted to drugs. George Bush is stupid. Reagan was not nearly as good of a president as Jimmy Carter.

Tucker: White people are evil. All black people are victims of white oppression. George Bush hates black people. Barack Obama is the messiah. The Bible is an old book of fairy tales(not kidding, she wrote that once), and so on and so forth.

I saw Cynthia Tucker on Hardball last week. She was on tv saying that Carter was essentially right about people who disagree with Obama as being racist. The race card is the only thing Cynthia has in her life. Makes me wonder if the AJC has threatened to fire her before only to find that she would sue out of racism. Sad woman.

Bookman and Tucker do not care about facts. They don’t weigh both sides and yet they get angry when people call them out for what they are.

Cynthia, just last week, had a blog on Communist China and how we should be like them. ????????
China is one of the worst places on earth for humanity.

Joan

September 24th, 2009
10:00 am

Just use common sense, and try not to pollute. But if we think America alone will stop global warning (on the assumption there is any validity to the thesis at all) we are nuts. We are a drop in the bucket compared to China and many other countries. And about energy efficiency–bring on the nuclear plants. I mean if a nuclear plant blows in any other country, we are going to feel the effects anyway. So, why can’t we take advantage of the clean energy it can create?

jconservative

September 24th, 2009
10:01 am

Global warming, global warming, global warming. I have been hearing that most of my adult life – about 50 years. Science does not understand the climate or how the earth actually works. There are plenty of hypotheses but no theories. Just not enough evidence.

Does global warming exist? What causes it? Does man have an effect?
Can science give us a cure? If science gave us a cure would we have the political will to use the cure? The answer to the the first four questions is “we do not know.” The answer to the last question is a resounding “NO”.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:05 am

For anyone who wants to piss of a liberal. Especially Bookman.

Obama Will Spend More on Welfare in the Next Year Than Bush Spent on Entire Iraq War, Study Reveals

Wednesday, September 23, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

As a candidate for president, Barack Obama decried the financial toll that the Iraq war was taking on the economy, but Obama’s proposed spending on welfare through 2010 will eclipse Bush’s war spending by more than $260 billion.

“Because of the Bush-McCain policies, our debt has ballooned,” then-Sen. Barack Obama told a Charleston, W.V., crowd in March 2008. “This is creating problems in our fragile economy. And that kind of debt also places an unfair burden on our children and grandchildren, who will have to repay it.”

During the entire administration of George W. Bush, the Iraq war cost a total of $622 billion, according to the Congressional Research Service.

President Obama’s welfare spending will reach $888 billion in a single fiscal year–2010–more than the Bush administration spent on war in Iraq from the first “shock and awe” attack in 2003 until Bush left office in January.

Elephant Whip

September 24th, 2009
10:05 am

My family has lived in East Cobb County for about 34 years. 20 to 30 years ago, there was serious sticking snow every year at least once or twice, and, in addition, light dustings and flurries.

Now it’s maybe one ice storm.

We also used to get into the single digits or negatives regularly in January and February. Now we rarely get to freezing, much less 0.

Now there is much more asphalt, subdivisions, and traffic.

This to me represents regional warming. Why wouldn’t a global building/gas emission/population boom cause this on a global scale?

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:07 am

Does anyone else think it strange that the people who applauded Obama are gutless dictators of third world countries?

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:12 am

Elephant Whip, Georgia has always had crazy weather. The south isn’t exactly the North Pole. I used to live in Atlanta and I can not remember the last time I had on a sweater in December. January and February are usually rainy and cold but rarely ever in the single digits. I don’t even think the “blizzard” of 93 dipped down below 20 degrees. If you want cold, move up here to Chicago. It will be cold in November with snow and ice.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:14 am

More bad news for democrats.

59% Say Americans Angrier Now Than Under Bush

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of U.S. voters believe that the current level of political anger in the country is higher than it was when George W. Bush was president.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 22% think the level of political anger is lower now, while 16% rate it as about the same.

Despite frequent Republican complaints about the vitriol leveled at President Bush, 69% of GOP voters say the level of anger is higher now, a view shared by 53% of Democrats and 56% of voters not affiliated with either party.

But just 12% of voters nationwide say that the opposition to President Obama’s health care plan and other initiatives is racist, as some prominent Democrats, including former President Jimmy Carter, have charged.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

Sixty-six percent (66%) of all voters say they’re at least somewhat angry about the current policies of the federal government, including 36% who are Very Angry.
Among those voters who are Very Angry, 74% say the level of anger is higher now, while 13% say it’s lower and 12% say it’s about the same.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/september_2009/59_say_americans_angrier_now_than_under_bush

Elephant Whip

September 24th, 2009
10:15 am

Does anyone else think it strange that George Senior, Rumsfeld, and George Junior shook hands with Saudis? That Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam?

Does anyone else think it strange that Bush did nothing about Saudi Arabia even though almost all of the 911 hijackers were from there, but instead started pounding dirt in Afghanistan, followed by an illegitimate war on non-nuclear, non-terrorist Iraq?

Elephant Whip

September 24th, 2009
10:17 am

Axel:

I’ve lived here for 34 years. I wouldn’t call Georgia weather crazy. And I think I have a better basis for my observations. You stick to Chicago. Actually, why don’t you save your blog for Chicago?

Partisay

September 24th, 2009
10:22 am

Looks like Beck, Hannity & Rush’s anti-government rhetoric is working according to plan:

MANCHESTER, Ky. — When Bill Sparkman told retired trooper Gilbert Acciardo that he was going door-to-door collecting census data in rural Kentucky, the former cop drew on years of experience for a warning: “Be careful.”

The 51-year-old Sparkman was found this month hanged from a tree near a Kentucky cemetery with the word “fed” scrawled on his chest, a law enforcement official said Wednesday, and the FBI is investigating whether he was a victim of anti-government sentiment.

The most deadly attack on federal workers came in 1995 when the federal building in Oklahoma City was devastated by a truck bomb, killing 168 and injuring more than 680. Timothy McVeigh, who was executed for the bombing, carried literature by ultra-right-wing, anti-government authors.

The Republican party has blood on their hands……………………..

jconservative

September 24th, 2009
10:25 am

Picking up on the thoughts of HSR0601.

The US really needs to get off its duff and handle the dependence on outside the border energy sources. We have oil, natural gas, coal, sun, wind, ocean currents, nuclear & geothermal – just to name a few off the top of my head. Yet we remain dependent on foreign governments.

The question is why we do nothing. Why do we do nothing?

Apparently the following are more important than the future existence of the USA:

Right to choose – right to life – Obama birthplace – Cheney lying – ACORN – torturing – RINOs – racist – etc, etc, etc.

Dunwoody Mike

September 24th, 2009
10:30 am

A two second Google search provided this link:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
And NOAA does NOT have a political agenda, they report the bloody weather. Just wanted to say that before the global warming deniers get their pants in a wad over objectivity.

Chris Broe

September 24th, 2009
10:31 am

Point of order. A potted plant like Lyle Kingfield exhales oxygen, not CO2.

Google: Planet Formation

F-105 Thunderchief

September 24th, 2009
10:33 am

Global warming or not, it is still in our nation’s best interest to lead the world in development and marketing of renewable energy technology. It would secure our economic future and our national security, as we rely less and less on foreign oil to power our economy.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:33 am

Elephant Whip wrote: I’ve lived here for 34 years. I wouldn’t call Georgia weather crazy. And I think I have a better basis for my observations. You stick to Chicago. Actually, why don’t you save your blog for Chicago?

I lived in Georgia for 26 years. I would call Georgia weather crazy. Georgia can get all seasons in one weeks time. And I think I have a better basis for my observations.

Save my blog for Chicago? What blog would that be?

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:36 am

Partisay, what literature did McVeigh have on him? I mean, the unibomber had a copy of Al Gores book on his nightstand. Does that mean Al Gore made him blow up people? Your logic is misguided and stupid.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:38 am

jconservative, have you been asleep for the last 2 years? MANY people want us to drill here and provide our own energy sources. Its the democrats and environmental groups that keep us from drilling here. ANWR, Gulf Coast, Montana and North Dakota all have TONS of oil we could be drilling for.

David Axelfraud

September 24th, 2009
10:39 am

F-105 Thunderchief, the biggest obstacle is environmentalists. Go talk to them and see where you get. Talk to Nancy Pelosi about drilling our own oil. Good luck.

F-105 Thunderchief

September 24th, 2009
10:45 am

No, there are plenty of obstacles on all political fronts, Axelfraud.