315 years…only a minute of time

IPCC apologized about the quote that the Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035. They are claiming a typo in transcription from the original paper that said they may disappear by the year 2350 (a 315 year error). Now that begins to make me wonder if the windows on everything haven't been shortened up? I mean really, a 315 year difference, doesn't anyone with a scientific background proofread these reports? http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/01/21/21climatewire-climate-science-panel-apologizes-for-himalay-25267.html I'm really beginning to question the 'IPCC's Stellar reputation' on climate science. The UN and governments looking at a cash cow in taxes as well as private individuals looking to make billions on trading gasses and paper (it don't even have to be paper now, it can be electronic impulses now) have created an artificial 'reputation' and its beginning to come unraveled.

I'd say we shouldn't look to any one entity (IPCC, NOAH, NASA etc.) to be the defining body on issues such as global warming. I know none of us want to be experts on all of these things like global warming, gun control, cap-n-tax, and healthcare, but can we trust the appointed experts? Who appointed them? What is the agenda behind the panel? Why do we need the panel? What laws will be enacted because of them?

When I look at the impacts of these kinds of panels I have to wonder. I hate government bureaucracy as much as the next guy (if not more), but having said that we need to slow down on making laws based solely on the recommendations of a panel of government appointed 'experts', especially when those laws are liable to tax us into a third world country.

prp

Climate change again

A few emails here, the head of the IPCC with conflict of interests charges there, IPCC glacier predictions questioned...it's not just one little thing, the whole process if flawed. When the governments of the world infuse so much money into it there is little possibility that corruption won't soon follow. The problem we all face NOW is who do we trust? IPCC isn't worthy, the U.N. has proven on a number of occasions to be corrupt, the U.S. government isn't any better, and the major schools studying it are getting huge grants from the government...who does it leave for us that are un-educated in the field to trust?

prp

Investment 101

I call it 101 because I don't know shit about it. I am willing to try and figure some of it out though. I got a call last night that said we have this new product that we are trying to introduce into the United States and would like for you to take a look at it. He went on to say that he would call me back after I viewed a 7.5 minute video and see if I liked what I saw. Well he sent me the video, which I watched http://amiraclemolecule.com/ron-media?PHPSESSID=1c9d39d0ec0979c373687130d2f40d94 and I think I'd sort of like to try this product…don't know but I like the idea of slowing down the aging process. Anyway he also asked that if I liked the video and idea, did I have 3 to 6 hours of time a week to invest in building an at home income. I said I could find that kind of time and to that said he asked if I had $300 bucks I could invest in it. I haven't talked to him after watching the video yet (was in a meeting when he called back this morning) but is that the investment? I get the right to contact other people and see if they are interested in an investment/make money from home project…they send me $300 of which I keep a percentage and send the rest on…another pyramid scheme??? Anyway it may all be legit but then I'd have a product I'd have to sell (maybe one I believed in but…)and I'm not a salesman.

On the other hand I could be an investor like the investors at the Investors Conference at the UN. They are urging governments to quick action on climate change legislation/rules, http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/19572 so they can invest in clean energy. Investor- verb- to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
Ok so now I know what an investor is and since I don't have any money I really can't be one but the investors at the investors conference at the UN do have money to invest so they can be…they just don't want to be, they want to be banks. They are urging governments to enact carbon trading schemes so they can invest…ok wait, isn't that like saying I want to gamble my money that green energy will boom and I'll make a much larger fortune, but if I'm going to do it I want government legislation that will guarantee a substantial return on my investment. Ok I guess that's an investment of sorts but we might as well change the definition of investor to read, Investor- verb- to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering guaranteed profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
Good, now the investors club including Gore and Soros, don't have to risk their next house payment, they will be guaranteed to have it.

prp

The evil rich guy

I keep seeing stuff on the tv about taxing only people that make over 250k a year and yet can identify an additional number of taxes on everyone that all stem from this health care debacle. No they are not direct taxes on the individual but are taxes none the less. But this really isn't the point of my post. The point of my post is that all (if not all then most) of the people calling for the re-distribution of your and my money ARE the evil rich guys. I look at Michael Moore telling us that we should share the wealth…how many homes does he own? Look at the President's home in Chicago http://chicago.about.com/od/neighborhoodshistory/ss/ObamaChicagoPic_3.htm . I don't live in a house like that. People can say all day 'but he is the leader of the free world, how would you want him to live?' and I would want him to live like that if he were promoting freedom and liberty but he is promoting socialism and if he's promoting it then he needs to live it. Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, Sean Penn, and most of the money making people with a camera and a soap box making millions are telling us to give up our standard of living so everyone can be equal, it don't work that way.

Take a peek at our world, there are over 6 billion people on this planet and over 75% of them live in poverty. While we can work to help people build themselves up, it only takes a look at the inner city of Detroit MI and other cities around our country that shows a handout doesn't help anyone better themselves. We have whole generations of welfare recipients that learn the more babies the more the government will give them. I'm not saying we shouldn't help people, I'm saying the government shouldn't take what we work for and force us to help people. As evidenced by the Haiti earthquake, the American people are willing to give and give until it hurts for a cause that is genuine, so why is there a need to spend our tax money for charitable giving.

Don't tell me I have to wear gray cotton pants and a gray cotton shirt when you wear a silk shirt and pants just so you can look like the masses and live like a king. We have a world of people trying to promote socialism that don't want to live their ideals. Let's see, isn't there an old saying here that fits…something about geese and ganders.

prp

CO2

For how many years have we been taught that CO2 was a natural part of our ecosystem? I know when I was growing up my mother told me that CO2 was the stuff we exhaled when we breathed and that if all we had were CO2, we couldn't survive. Well needless to say I was a thinking little tyke (I'm going to have to look up where tyke came from) and I was immediately wondering what was going to happen when we exhaled so much that CO2 was all that was left. Well my wonderful mother soothed my fears by taking me into the woods and showing me trees, bushes, grass and flowers and said that if we didn't breathe it out then these things couldn't live. She said that the bad stuff we breathed out was the good stuff that all the plants used to breathe in and in turn the bad stuff they breathed out was the good stuff we breathed in, so no matter how much articles like http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090209205202.htm try to tell me how and why plants grow better with higher concentrations of CO2 I'm still gonna stick with what momma told me, she wouldn't lie.

tyke 

c.1400, "cur, mongrel," from O.N. tik "bitch," related to M.L.G. tike. Also applied to a low-bred or lazy man. The meaning "child" is from 1902, though it was used in playful reproof from 1894.

Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper
Cite This Source

Now NASA oh how the mighty are falling

"It has been revealed that a "sleight of hand" was used in the computer program that rated 2005 as "THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD." Skeptical climate researchers have discovered extensive manipulation of the data within the U.S. Government's two primary climate centers: the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) in Asheville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. These centers are being accused of creating a strong bias toward warmer temperatures through a system that dramatically trimmed the number and cherry-picked the locations of weather observation stations they use to produce the data set on which temperature record reports are based. The two investigators say the system has been distorted in other ways as well. They have documented their findings in great detail in a scientific report that has been posted online. These findings are presented as a part of my television special report "Global Warming: The Other Side" telecast Thursday night, January 14th at 9 PM here on KUSI TV." http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/40749822.html
This comes from KUSI NEWS in San Diego, and to use one of the Presidents favorite lines "Let's be clear here", that this isn't definitive evidence that these two organizations have done anything wrong, though I'd be willing to bet my carbon footprint against Al Gore's that the data was trimmed and tweaked to fit some agenda. Keep in mind that NASA is and has always been a government funded organization so to find the agenda behind its data doesn't on its surface seem to difficult. The other one is in the same boat. So now we find the government is lying to us yet again. I don't know, should we be watching our government a little closer? Are they really spending our tax dollars wisely? I have gotten so jaded lately about the government that I can't even bring myself to watch the news for fear I'll see another trillion dollar bill being passed in the congress, or some organization that isn't supposed to set law trying to do that with rules like the EPA. The EPA is moving forward on making rules that businesses have to abide by on their carbon emissions, which will in effect place a cap-and-trade scheme on American businesses without there ever being a law passed.
I've heard it with the health care bill, I'm hearing it from the EPA and soon every government entity will be putting its rules into place. There have been Senators who have said that the constitutionality of forcing the American people to purchase health care, is a section that will have to go before the court system but that they are sure it will be upheld. We have Kentucky (Kentucky is gonna want to kick my ass over this, it's really Nebraska) getting a payoff to vote for the bill, we have Louisiana getting a payoff to vote for the bill and now we have unions getting a deal so they will support the bill.
Is this what the EPA will be doing with the green house gas emissions rules they are perusing. Pass them and force someone to spend their hard earned profits to hire attorneys to take the EPA to court to make sure if they do or don't have the authority to pass and enforce those rules. The EPA in light of the failing Climate Change agenda is about to up the ante, can your wallet and mine take this?
prp

Promises for the New Year…don’t make em and you won’t break em…

I don't make promises for the new year because I've found over the years that I have a tendency backslide. I promised for years that I would quit smoking…every New Years for years and it didn't happen. One year about 20 years ago I did quit but it had nothing to do with a New Years promise/resolution, what it had to do with was my life. I've promised for years to lose the extra few pounds I have put on over the years that now equal about 40…hasn't happened. I've promised to learn this or do that, and each and every time I fail. I think the New Year's resolution thing is a big plan for failure. Now that's the personal side of this, but for some there are some great ideas and resolutions out there and if they can be kept we may all be better off for it.

Reading an article or two on Gun Control I found this gem http://www.bakersfield.com/news/columnist/merlo/x113238579/My-promises-for-the-New-Year . I don't know Steve Merlo but he appears to have his head screwed on straight and I hope he is better at his resolutions than I am. Another article that I found intriguing, though not a New Year's resolution article was this one protesting Obamacare http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_14099060 . Also if your mayor is a member of Bloomberg's MAIG group (you can check here http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=254&issue=011) you might want to call or write him/her a letter and urge them to resign from that group.

A site called Squidoo has the top ten New Year's resolutions listed for the common folk but they aren't what I'm looking for…here they are and below that is how I stack up on them.

• 1. Stop smoking
  
• 2. Get Fit
  
• 3. Lose Weight
  
• 4. Enjoy Life More
  
• 5. Quit Drinking
  
• 6. Get Organised
  
• 7. Learn Something New
  
• 8. Get Out of Debt
  
• 9. Spend more time with the Family
  
• 10. Help Others
  

1. Stop smoking…20 years past that
   
2. Get fit…fat chance
   
3. Lose weight…see my second answer
   
4. Enjoy life more…I couldn't stand it if I enjoyed it any more
   
5. Quit drinking… see my second and fourth answers
   
6. Get organized…may be worth trying but see my second answer
   
7. Learn something new…well that's stupid, I don't think a day goes by that you don't learn something new…well unless you're in a coma or something.
   
8. Get out of debt…see my second answer
   
9. Spend more time with the family…well I guess that depends on whether or not the family wants to spend more time with me now doesn't it.
   
10. Help others…one of the only worthwhile resolutions in the bunch.
    

The resolutions I'm looking for are ones like:

Mayor Bloomberg resolves to stop going after legal gun owners. News flash; After Mayor Bloomberg got legislation passed in his city that bans all handguns, his bodyguards were arrested and charged with illegal possession of a handgun. Because the mayor's bodyguards were in jail, the mayor was stabbed on his way to work. He is in stable condition at New York's Our Lady of Hope and Change Hospital.

President Obama resolves to stop this spending binge. News Flash; President Obama stopped at McDonalds on his way back to the White House to get the girls a Big Mac, Fries and a Coke. The total cost of the bill was $148,627.23. Meal=$14.71, Tax=$21.75, cost of getting the GAO impact study=$120,500.00 and cost of the motorcade detour=$28,090.77.

Harry Reid resolves to resign this year. News Flash; Harry Reid issued a statement right after the Senate started its 2010 session saying that because he had been blinded by the light emanating from our Nobel wining President he misplaced the trust the Nevadan people had for him, so doing the honorable thing he decided to step down, right after he votes no on health care.

Nancy Pelosi resolves to do number 9 above and leave the American People alone. News Flash; Nancy Pelosi after hearing of her favorite Senator resigning stated that there was no longer a reason to stay in Washington. She would no longer feel the warmth of his bony white hand clutching her shoulder and needed the warmth of her family back in San Francisco.

Eric Holder resolves to understand that his agenda isn't what the American People want. News Flash; Eric Holder got hold of all the faxes and emails that his staff had been keeping from him and came to the grim realization that the American People do not want his brand of gun control. Mr. Holder being a man of the highest moral fabric vowed to stay in office and do nothing until President Obama leaves office, at which time he will resign and move to Finland where the people want gun control.

Congress resolves to stay out of Washington for the year. News Flash; Members of Congress realized that every time they pass a law they screw up something else in America, so in their first legislative move for 2010 they passed a congressional resolution to stay out of Washington for a year, in hopes of doing no more harm to the country.

We can only hope.

prp

The cost of letting government get involved with our lives

Liberals have a tendency to think that the more government equalizes everyone, the better off we all are. How can it be that when the government gets involved in our economy we get programs like 'cash for clunkers'? While everyone on the left touts that as a successful program the government spent approximately $18,000 of our tax dollars for each car they took off the road. Far cry from the $4500 your dealership got for trading in your clunker wasn't it.

Another of the great farces the government has perpetrated on us is the foreclosure stabilization bill they put through…the government has spent a whopping $800,000+ on each house they saved from foreclosure. They gave it to the banks. Now I'm not too sure my math is right here, but if the government bought a house for $150,000, they could have paid cash for 5+ houses for the one they saved from foreclosure and the 'owner' still has a mortgage to the bank. So for the 27 billion they spent to save some 33,750 homes from foreclosure they could have paid cash for 180,000 homes leaving the people who couldn't afford the homes they bought in the first place a home completely paid off…go figure.

Now don't get me wrong, I've been against the bailouts even when George Bush signed the first one, Barrack Obama signed the second one, when the bailed out AIG, the big banks, and GM and Chrysler, I'm against the extra bailout they are giving GMAC now because they just didn't get quite enough of our tax dollars the first time and now they want to "fix" the health care system in this country. Where the hell are their brains, does Harry Reid think he can bring a couple billion into the state and save his job? That couple billion is coming from you and me so why don't they just let us keep the couple billion and call it good.

It's amazing to me how the people on the left don't understand that when an organization that runs on the 'cheapest bid' philosophy, and can continually spend 5 to 25 times the market value for everything they touch, that they are corrupt. Harry Reid is a lawyer by profession and by all accounts, is now a rich one, but wait he didn't have a thriving law practice, he's been in government most of his working life. Hell I got into the wrong business, being a representative of the people is where you get rich. We sure do pay well don't we.

prp