Friday, June 30, 2006

Winger "Science"

Funny how the best science we have is unanimous on global warming yet elected officials refuse to believe it. It is a sad statement on what constitutes reality when ideology is at the helm. These people should be run from office.

I appreciate your letter regarding Assembly Bill 32 (Pavley), which
expands the responsibilities of the California Climate Action Registry
by requiring certain regulations of greenhouse gas emissions.

This bill is one of several being pushed through the Legislature that
advocate a theory that humans are perpetuating catastrophic global
warming. This theory is based on faulty and incomplete science, and
given the potentially devastating economic impact of such proposals,
policymakers must be confident that sufficient scientific evidence
exists to support the underlying premise of global warming.

Our planet is subject to natural, periodic shifts in climate. In fact,
we have seen three distinct periods of atmospheric climate change just
in the last century: warming in the early 1900's, cooling in the
mid-1900's, and warming toward the end of the century. And remember,
only three decades ago a TIME magazine cover story warned of apocalyptic
consequences as a result of the earth's cooling trend, which gave rise
to congressional hearings warning of an "Ice Age."

While AB 32 is relatively modest, it is still based on the same alarmist
rhetoric and incomplete science, and I find it difficult to support such
a measure.


George Runner

Thursday, June 29, 2006


Apparently "more than a liter of sarin" was found in Iraq from testimony before the house Armed Services Committee, according to Gen. Michael Maples. I mean, whatever. The idea that Iraq had something "gas-like" was a given, but how much, and how able was it? In a worldwide effort requiring a war, which has bankrupted the country and enriched Houston companies has always been the question. This strikes me as grasping at straws. Moreover, why is partisan journalist Frank Gaffney a witness? He is not an authority save in partisanship from the hard right. Is this what it's come to? David Kay found nothing. No ad ignoratiam from shills can replace this with facts. Invisible facts, they like, and rely on explicitly. 500 shells? A worldwide threat? Give me a break.

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Big Melt

"JAKOBSHAVN GLACIER, Greenland — Gripping a bottle of Jack Daniel's between his knees, Jay Zwally savored the warmth inside the tiny plane as it flew low across Greenland's biggest and fastest-moving outlet glacier."

You gotta love getting Jack Daniel's into the lede.


Friday, June 23, 2006

Gobal Warming Confirmed

Yeah. Like, we've been saying.

The Wicked Witch of Wingerville

Steve Sack: Minneapolis Star Tribune

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

du Pont Madness

Not published in response to Pete "silver spoon" du Pont spouting the same energy fallacies.

The following letter has been submitted via the OpinionJournal article response feature.
Contents of response as follows:

Name: Mark A. York
City/State: Sunland, CA
Date: Wed, June 21st, 2006

Re: Addicted to Regulation

Again, the false premise is we have enough oil to substitute importation from the Middle East, when the facts of geology tell any objective observer we don't, despite the data puffery written here. Practically the entire North Slope of Alaska is already the national petroleum reserve, and the rest under development right now. Why is this not enough now? Why hasn't a gas pipeline been built along the current oil pipeline? It's simple: the oil companies can't devise a profitable incentive to build it even with doubled prices for the product, so they just burn it off at the well head. Conservationists aren't against this either so shelve that fallacy for another day. The ANWR straw man only works for true believers who have never looked at a seismic map of the world. Theirs is a world of fiction. Of course they deny global warming too so this is right up that blind alley. Dead end governor.

Threat to the Planet

Jim Hansen on the latest media efforts in both film and book.

Sea level Rise

The predictions average out on 4-5 meters by 2100. That's much more than the "19 inches" claim by Bailey in the Reason piece. No suprise there. That's enough to cause a lot of damage to coastal zones, where large cities are located worldwide.

Monday, June 19, 2006

Warmest Ever

Warm World

And this screed which wingervillains are touting everywhere to slam Al Gore is written by an engineer from a PR firm. Whoo ahhh!

Gotta love those Canadians, and Ozzies who think that fringe geologists and economists know more about climate science than NASA.

As I've said Gore got it right. Showing he was a liberal arts student at Harvard has no bearing on it. He isn't applying for a job as a climate scientist at NASA where that would indeed be a problem. I work for the feds so I know the kind of educational scrutiny personnel go into even over a seasonal job. It's an irrelevant conclusion, since most conservative columnists didn't graduate at all. See John Fund and James Taranto as examples of this.

Tim Lambert eviscerates the article by this PR shill better than I. The bottomline is this: they employ propaganda tactics to obscure the truth. That's a lie where I come from. Don't listen to them. Only idiots believe this crap.

Hello Mudda Hello Fadda

Things are swell here in Camp Grenada.

Sunday, June 18, 2006

The Denialist

Is Ronald Bailey of reason magazine up to his usual misinformation. He is also an "adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute." If that isn't enough there's the denialist books to seal the deal. Yeah I get it that he doesn't believe in global warming, and is an attribution sceptic , but it's real nonetheless and his argument here fails miserably.
Perhaps some global warming skeptics are paid advocates (liars), but many are not. Gore's tobacco industry insinuation is an attempt to discredit opponents by smear rather than on the basis of scientific evidence.
Boy is this ever the pot calling the cauldron black. Notice how Bailey doesn't name any? That's because they are all paid advocates, except Bill Gray who is just crazy on his own when it comes to global warming denial.

Saturday, June 17, 2006

The Kennedy Meadows Fish Derby

I have anecdotal evidence that two rainbow trout were caught on worms, no less. I didn't catch any on flies. The water is high; screaming meany high on the north fork. And hot. Brother, what a day for swimming, which I did with relish in Brush Creek. I have to say I'm a bit disappointed in the quality of the South Fork of the Kern River. I can't vouch for the wilderness section, which has to be better, but the dry windy cow pasture that is Kennedy Meadows left me cold even in 100 degree heat. At 9200 feet I found snow for my cooler and gazed upon the white visage of Mt. Whitney, our highest mountain in the lower 48. The Warm World is really upon us when you're barely comfortable that high because of heat.

Thursday, June 15, 2006


New National Monument. Now how about ANWR? In the next term perhaps?


"Today is the birthday of a great man," as my father Russell would say of his own on August 4th, always adding "with all due modesty." In this case, me. I spent it at Point Dume Beach in Malibu, California reading Hemingway's A Moveable Feast. I looked for a place to sit on the rocks and found the niche occupied by a large Norway rat. I moved accordingly. That would have implications of Stephen King for some, but not me. We've got quite a rat problem here in SoCal this year. More indications of the Warm World that is upon us. That and my first movie experience was as playing a maintenence man in Graveyard Shift.

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Bush Lied

The following letter has been submitted via the OpinionJournal article response feature.
Contents of response as follows:

Name: Mark A. York
City/State: Sunland, CA
Date: Tue, June 13th, 2006

Re: Correcting the Hayden Record

It seems the objection is for Hayden telling the truth about something. In this case the bogus Al Qaeda/Iraq partnership to hear some tell it, and that group includes the president, especially the Feithdom at Defense at the time. I have no doubt Bush believed it because he believes what he wants about everything even when it bares little resemblance to reality. Any objective scan will find plenty of evidence for this trend.

No, your objections, and Senator Kyle's are that the truth is closer to what Senator Levin is saying than yours. The CIA analysts reported how dubious these so-called connections were, yet they were ignored in favor of the longest shot which was the favored view. This was hyped and pumped into the American airwaves and collective conciousness. It wasn't real. That may not be out-and-out lying, but it's misinformation at the very least.

As the line goes, "You can't handle the truth."


Not published.

Monday, June 12, 2006

The Coulter Brigade

After watching Larry King tonight the only cure I can think of for David Horowitz is electric shock therapy. It's possible this could center him between the opposing ideological walls of communism, in which he was raised, and hardline totalitarian conservatism, where he now ravingly lives. Coulter of course is a crude inflammatory nutball. But it sells: to other nutballs. Publishers are whores personified. If there's an audience they provide the product. The message doesn't have to be valid, true, or anything close to it. I suspect she's teetering on the edge of defamation with her latest ploy, but this is standard fare for their ilk. My opinion is she's a vile Northeast Elitist Trustfunder (NET) just like the Bushes. It's easy to understand. It's just that it isn't worth anything valuewise.

George's Willful Oblivion

Ray Pierrehumbert on George Will's "Goring."

Sunday, June 11, 2006

Ms. Brown cont'd

As I wrote a year ago the real mystery in The Da Vinci Code is who is Ahamedd Saaddoodeen? Some readers are speculating what this phrase means on Lew Perdue's blog and in New York after Seth Mnookin's great piece in Vanity Fair on the case. Reporting on the story of the story of the case is slipshod. Lewis Perdue was sued by Random House after contacting them about the similarities between DVC and his two novels. The impression is he sued them first. He didn't.

Monday, June 05, 2006

The Hypocrisy of Absolutewrite

2003 Yeah, don't "dredge up old threads, because we wouldn't want everything to be about Publishamerica," says Ms. Glatzer.

"Hey spiffy new digs man, I'm going to keep this puppy open," says James D. Macdonald. I'm the guy on the old thread along with Laverne who was the only one with the guts to stick with me on the plan at the time. The poster got me banned at the time for daring to suggest her book was worthless. Her publisher? Publishamerica of course. Now what they really need is the Street Smart Writer. Step right up we got you covered. Royalties please, right this way.

Sunday, June 04, 2006

Warm World

Pollen has always been my enemy and this will get worse as the CO2 content in the atmosphere increases according to this study: Interaction of the Onset of Spring and Elevated Atmospheric CO2 on Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) Pollen Production

Saturday, June 03, 2006

Gore Responds

"Gravity may repel us from the earth's surface. It's an open question," he says with dripping sarcasm. It's only propagandists - "immoral and unethical," he calls them " that fight the reality of global warming."

He's right as I've been saying.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

The Wild Side

I can't recommend Dr. Olivia Judson enough. She's great. For those both curious, and incurious, the closer look at life you'll get with her as a guide is invaluable. Go.

Tempest in a Teapot Dome

Here's another good piece in the WP Magazine. Bill Gray sounds like the raving lunatic he has become, an example of when good scientists refuse to learn new things. This is a very basic lesson of scientific history.

Swift Boating the Planet

For the dim bulbs bent on libeling me, which is chargeable against bloggers, hint, hint, this is what Krugman said. After completing a novel on the subject to counter the Crichton misrepresentation, a key part of the collective smear, I knew who and what he would need to address from such a title a priori. Study is something that the blathering idiots including George M. Roper, and Woody the dizzy accountant from Atlanta are incapable of. Theirs is a world of disinformation and ridicule that reminds me of the parable of "The Ark." The ones who prepared for impending disaster were mocked and derided by the disolute money grubbers. Then the rains came and the sea rose. They banged on the sides of the vessel to no avail and drowned. It's a fitting end for fools. Liars pay. Remember it.

PAUL KRUGMAN: Swift Boating the Planet

A brief segment in "An Inconvenient Truth" shows Senator Al Gore questioning James Hansen, a climatologist at NASA, during a 1989 hearing. But the movie doesn't give you much context, or tell you what happened to Dr. Hansen later.

And that's a story worth telling, for two reasons. It's a good illustration of the way interest groups can create the appearance of doubt even when the facts are clear and cloud the reputations of people who should be regarded as heroes. And it's a warning for Mr. Gore and others who hope to turn global warming into a real political issue: you're going to have to get tougher, because the other side doesn't play by any known rules.

Dr. Hansen was one of the first climate scientists to say publicly that global warming was under way. In 1988, he made headlines with Senate testimony in which he declared that "the greenhouse effect has been detected, and it is changing our climate now." When he testified again the following year, officials in the first Bush administration altered his prepared statement to downplay the threat. Mr. Gore's movie shows the moment when the administration's tampering was revealed.

In 1988, Dr. Hansen was well out in front of his scientific colleagues, but over the years that followed he was vindicated by a growing body of evidence. By rights, Dr. Hansen should have been universally acclaimed for both his prescience and his courage.

But soon after Dr. Hansen's 1988 testimony, energy companies began a campaign to create doubt about global warming, in spite of the increasingly overwhelming evidence. And in the late 1990's, climate skeptics began a smear campaign against Dr. Hansen himself.

Leading the charge was Patrick Michaels, a professor at the University of Virginia who has received substantial financial support from the energy industry. In Senate testimony, and then in numerous presentations, Dr. Michaels claimed that the actual pace of global warming was falling far short of Dr. Hansen's predictions. As evidence, he presented a chart supposedly taken from a 1988 paper written by Dr. Hansen and others, which showed a curve of rising temperatures considerably steeper than the trend that has actually taken place.

In fact, the chart Dr. Michaels showed was a fraud â?? that is, it wasn't what Dr. Hansen actually predicted. The original paper showed a range of possibilities, and the actual rise in temperature has fallen squarely in the middle of that range. So how did Dr. Michaels make it seem as if Dr. Hansen's prediction was wildly off? Why, he erased all the lower curves, leaving only the curve that the original paper described as being "on the high side of reality."

The experts at, the go-to site for climate science, suggest that the smears against Dr. Hansen "might be viewed by some as a positive sign, indicative of just how intellectually bankrupt the contrarian movement has become." But I think they're misreading the situation. In fact, the smears have been around for a long time, and Dr. Hansen has been trying to correct the record for years. Yet the claim that Dr. Hansen vastly overpredicted global warming has remained in circulation, and has become a staple of climate change skeptics, from Michael Crichton to Robert Novak.

There's a concise way to describe what happened to Dr. Hansen: he was Swift-boated.
John Kerry, a genuine war hero, didn't realize that he could successfully be portrayed as a coward. And it seems to me that Dr. Hansen, whose predictions about global warming have proved remarkably accurate, didn't believe that he could successfully be portrayed as an unreliable exaggerator. His first response to Dr. Michaels, in January 1999, was astonishingly diffident. He pointed out that Dr. Michaels misrepresented his work, but rather than denouncing the fraud involved, he offered a rather plaintive appeal for better behavior.

Even now, Dr. Hansen seems reluctant to say the obvious. "Is this treading close to scientific fraud?" he recently asked about Dr. Michaels's smear. The answer is no: it isn't "treading close," it's fraud pure and simple.

Now, Dr. Hansen isn't running for office. But Mr. Gore might be, and even if he isn't, he hopes to promote global warming as a political issue. And if he wants to do that, he and those on his side will have to learn to call liars what they are.
The Environmental Webring
The Environmental Webring
[ Join Now | Ring Hub | Random | << Prev | Next >> ]