DeSmog blog (no link–I don’t want to help their traffic numbers) has an article on wastewater from oilfields. Seems the beloved government regulators are not doing enough to protect us from toxins. So, in line with the totally irrational, but expected thinking of the enviros, I propose no water that ever fell through polluted air, was ever used for waste disposal, ever used to wash a car, ever used to bathe a child be declared OFF LIMITS. Only pure water can be consumed by humans and used to grow food. The rain falling from the sky is poison, so we shall have to use ground water to grow vegetables, unless there are any molecules of contamination found in the water. No contamination is natural. Anything chemical means no using the water for drinking or growing food. We cannot take any chances whatsoever. There is no safe limit for anything. We are all going to DIE. Yes, we are. If we actually keep printing, reporting and subscribing to the insanity of these people. Want to kill millions? Just start following the insane edicts of the “Save the Earth” crowd. (Hint: You are not on their list to survive. They are not saving you.)
CNSnews.com reports a Maryland carpenter is building an altar for the Pope’s visit that is eco-friendly with an eye on climate change (This is probably better than the transgender and openly gay Episcopal bishop Obama is bringing, I would note. Rudeness and stupidity run all the way to the top in America. Obama will be remembered as the rudest, stupiest president ever. Jimmy Carter looks good in comparison to Obama). It’s made of poplar wood. This somehow qualifies as not exploiting the environment or native workers. Since ironwork is necessary for the tools to build this, even if it’s all hand tools, I see environmental exploitation. I’m assuming the trees died a natural death and were used for that reason. Exploiting native workers would probably mean that no individuals in dire need of income were used in the making of the project because they would be underpaid. No money is better than being insulted with a pittance salary. This project is in agreement with the Pope and his policies–completely contradictory and emotional. No science, no real thought. Congratulations.
Great news for global warming believers–a NEW statistical method now shows the pause never happened. It’s interesting that the old ones all showed it did. If everyone was wrong before, how can we know they are right now? How many other new methods have been invented and then discarded because the answer was not in line with the stated goal of “fixing” that nasty pause? We’ll never know, will we? What you can conclude from this is global warming science has no idea what it is doing other than forcing data to fit a theory. That is NOT science. Once again, an admission to the clueless nature of the beast. (I notice in the Washington Post, the trend line conveniently now begins at 1950. Would that “new” method involve moving the endpoints on the regression line? That’s not new. That’s how you make the data say what you want it to. It’s a known advantage to regression lines in a time series. You can pick start and end points and get whatever answer you want.) It is interesting how many new studies and statistical methods have been INVENTED to study and fix the pause. If that doesn’t prove definitively that the data is being manipulated to confirm the theory and reality ignored in favor of saving the theory, nothing does. This is all about doing whatever it takes to keep the lie going—and it’s obviously a lie or there would not be such heroic measures being taken and such lengths gone to in order to fabricate repairs to a destroyed theory.
Lew is apparently at it again with a “blind expert study” where the climate data is presented as world agricultural output data and experts are asked if there is a trend. Fascinating. I wonder if we could use that same technique to say, ask experts if the grant money going to the global warming crew is outrageously high. We could tell them it’s money to corporate CEOs as compensation for a job well done. That wouldn’t have an emotional component to an economist, would it? Perhaps we could take oil company earnings and couch them as charitable donations and see if anyone thinks the amounts are out of line. It is, quite frankly, insane to believe statistics can be separated from their input data and assumptions. Statistics always depend on the input parameters and the accuracy of underlying assumptions. That a Global Average Temperature exists and has meaning is a HUGE underlying assumption that you cannot wish away by lying to experts and telling them it’s world agricultural output. It’s completely dishonest and deliberate deception. Yet this is how global warming scientists work–break all the rules to get the answer desired. Lewendosky is a disgrace to the profession.