Log In

|

Sign
Up

Your Source for Conservative News, Cartoons, Issues, Blogs
& Magazines

Home

Columnists

Election Results

Tipsheet

News

Political Cartoons

Talk
Radio

Video

Photos

Community

Issues

TH
Magazine

Finance

Townhall Columnists Paul Driessen EPA's Texas Power Grab

Paul
Driessen

EPA's Texas Power Grab
Email Paul Driessen | Columnist's Archive

Share

Tweet

Sign-Up

Editor's note: This column was co-authored by Willie Soon.

Any Texas granddaddy will tell you he’s seen it all, when it comes to weather
and climate extremes. Tornadoes, hurricanes, heat waves, blizzards, droughts,
flash floods, and storms that bring unique combinations of wind, dust, thunder
and hail.

Any Lone Star citizen will point out that Texas is America’s leading producer
of crude oil, natural gas and (heavily subsidized) wind-based energy. It has the
second largest workforce and gross state product in the USA, produces more
electricity than any other state, and refines one-fourth of our petroleum – for
a country that is 85% dependent on fossil fuels.

Mess with Texas, and the damages will reverberate throughout our nation.

So why is the US Environmental Protection Agency sending federal agents to
Texas – to arrest the state’s economy for the “crime” of emitting carbon dioxide
(CO2) and methane (CH4)? Texas is also challenging EPA over other arbitrary new
air pollution standards, but that’s another article.

Cowboys and cowgirls recognize CO2 as the plant-fertilizing “gas of life” and
CH4 as natural gas and cow farts. Scientists will tell you carbon dioxide is
0.0387% of Earth’s atmosphere and methane is 0.000179 percent. Anyone with an
eighth grade economics education or ounce of common sense knows CO2 is what
results when CH4 heats homes, generates electricity, fuels cars and factories,
and makes our health, welfare and living standards possible.

But EPA says they are “greenhouse gases” that cause “runaway global warming.”
So the ideologues who run this agency are telling Texas to start regulating its
power plants and refineries into bankruptcy or oblivion – or EPA goons will take
over its air quality programs and economy.

Since few cowboys and cowgirls – or even college grads or most PhDs – are
experts on “greenhouse” gases and radiation physics, let’s take a quick look at
what’s behind these EPA claims.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson says her agency’s actions will “protect human
health and welfare” and “ensure environmental justice,” which are “threatened”
by rising temperatures and “global climate disruption.” Let EPA regulate these
evil greenhouse gases, she promises, and the climate will remain “stable” and
average global temperatures will never be more than 2 degrees higher than now.
Bunk.

Ms. Jackson willfully ignores the immense harm that driving up energy prices
will have on jobs, state revenues, people’s health and welfare, and even human
lives. But her views are supported by scientists like Dr. Richard Alley, Michael
Mann’s colleague at Pennsylvania State University, all handsomely paid by EPA
and other federal agencies for raising alarms about global warming.

Alley was recently extolled in the New York Times (which no real, red-blooded
Texans reads) as a “major voice of climate science.” He says that under a true
worst-case scenario of doubling the concentration of CO2 and methane, our planet
will fry due to 18 to 20 degrees F of global warming.

This much gas of life and cow farts, the great professor insists, would
result in “an addition of heat so radical that it would render the planet
unrecognizable to its present-day inhabitants.” He bases this horrifying
prediction on computer models that assume human CO2 and CH4 control our climate
– not the sun and dozens of powerful, complex, interacting natural forces.

The fact is, mankind has been emitting gas of life and cow farts since time
immemorial. However, according to MIT’s Dr. Richard Lindzen, we are still only
80% of the way toward doubling the greenhouse gas levels found in our atmosphere
at the start of the Industrial Revolution (0.0280%). But taking Dr. Alley’s
computer models and doomsday predictions at their word, 80% of the way should
mean temperatures in the great state of Texas should have warmed some 14 to 16
degrees between 1860 and 2010.

Hooo-weee … is that HOT, or what?

Something doesn’t seem quite right here. National Climate Data Center studies
show Texas’ annual mean temperature fluctuates from year to year – but has
generally been 65 to 71 degrees F, from 1895 through 2010. (We don’t have
reliable data before 1895.) From the rear view of flatulent Texas longhorns,
that’s a change of just 6 degrees, up or down, with no two years of identical
weather, for 116 years!

Where in tarnation are those extra 10 to 12 degrees of warming that Professor
Alley (in his generous spirit of “worst-case scenarios”) assures us are
happening? Did the Grinch steal them? Or are those missing degrees just lurking
out there, waiting to surprise us the instant CO2 levels hit 560 ppm (0.0560% of
the atmosphere)? Does nature actually work that way: no response, no response –
then, bam!?!? Disaster!

He and Professor Mann and Penn State sure did get a lot of millions from us
taxpayers, to cook up all these disaster scenarios. So there must be something
to them. (One of their buddies got a pile of taxpayer cash for saying dinosaur
farts “may have contributed to global warming” 70 million years ago!)

But farmers and ranchers in Texas just cannot find that missing “heat” in
their cows or plants or wild grasses. No one can find that “heat” in hurricane,
tornado, hail or dust storm records, either. In fact, NOAA tells us, strong
tornadoes, among top-three ranks in wind and damage scales, have been occurring
less and less since record intensities during 1950s and 1960s.

That’s just the opposite of what the good professor, his sidekick Al Gore and
their Climate Doomsday Gang say will happen. But isn’t that good news for Texas?

In fact, using their logic, we could argue that, since CO2 has been rising
while tornado intensity is falling, maybe we should increase carbon dioxide even
more, to eventually turn tornadoes into dust devils. Or say decreasing CO2
emissions could cause stronger tornadoes and damage to ramp up again.

Somehow, we don’t think carbon dioxide or methane has quite this power. We
suspect there are a lot of other, far stronger, natural forces at work – causing
all kinds of cyclical climate patterns. Ms. Jackson and Dr. Alley’s
computer-created monsters might have a role in Frankenstein, raptor and
blood-lusting alien movies. They should play no role in dictating Texas energy
use and economic decisions.

So now the alarmists from the Climate Doomsday Gang have a new scare. Global
warming from rising CO2 is going to cause more vector-borne diseases like
malaria, dengue fever and West Nile Virus. Are you a-trembling in your
bull-doodoo -covered boots now?

If Texas didn’t have decent history books in its classrooms, you might
actually buy this scary story. But as those books show, malaria was eradicated
in Texas and the USA during the 1950s, thanks to DDT, window screens and medical
advances – not because the state’s climate got too cold or dry for anopheles
mosquitoes.

Moreover, from 1980 to 1999 there were 62,514 cases of dengue fever (from
mosquito bites) in northeastern Mexico. Meanwhile, just across the border, only
64 cases of dengue were counted in Texas. The disparate disease rates are
clearly not due to the climate, but to differences in housing, medical care,
wealth and technology.

The alarmists need to get their computer models, scenarios, scare stories and
climate cops out of Texas. If they don’t, Governor Perry and his Texas Rangers
should arrest them for violating Lone Star rights to energy, jobs, health and
the American Dream.

Willie Soon is an independent climate scientist and solar physicist.

Paul Driessen
Paul Driessen is senior policy adviser for the Committee
For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), which is sponsoring the All Pain No Gain petition against
global-warming hype. He also is a senior policy adviser to the Congress of
Racial Equality and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power - Black Death.

Be the first to read Paul Driessen's column. Sign up today and receive
Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Most Recent Articles

Does
Fort Worth Ever Cross Your Mind?

Personal
Well-being Overshadows Income Inequality

Kaine:
No serious 2012 primary challenge to Obama

Intimidation
and Tyranny

US
charges filed in Sen. Levin pie-in-face case

Obama
barbecues with old friends on North Shore

US,
Venezuela evict ambassadors in diplomatic spat

Chrysler,
Ford recall thousands of trucks and SUVs

Sign-Up to receive Updates from TH
Sign
Up

Send Email to Paul Driessen
Your Email Address:Required
Invalid
format
Your Subject:
Your
Message:
Cancel

Join the Debate

532 Comments So
Far

Login in
to Post Your Comments

« Previous12345678Next
» Newest
First Oldest First

Otto
Bismarke Wrote: 2 hours ago (4:17 PM)

Who shot down the 'Moon Colony?'

Which party
TODAY has a slobbering love affair with Moon Colonies and human exploration of
Mars? Let's move into the 21st century!

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

olive Wrote: 4 hours ago
(2:47 PM)

Many Neo-Con Republicans like suppressing the real cost
that America spends for its defense and national security needs. The number,
often heard, is that the U.S. spends only 5% of GDP for defense. This number
represents only the budget for the Department of Defense. Other departments in
the US government also spend money for defense.

To name a few, the
Veterans Administration spent 100 billion last year. The Department of Energy,
annually, spends 20 on nuclear weapons. Other departments responsible for
national security are the National Security Agency (30 billion), the CIA (40)
and one could even include the Coast Guard (8 billion). These are all yearly
costs. I'm tired of Neo-Cons saying that the National Security Agency has
nothing to do with national security.

Oh. Let's add on the cost of the
War on Terror. The war in Iraq was costing 120 billion dollars a year and the
war in Afghanistan now costs 80 billion dollars a year. All this added up means
that the U.S.A. now spends double or about 10% of GDP on defense. Can't we
conservatives agree that honest assessments are needed to plan for the future?

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Olive Hoyle Wrote: 5 hours
ago (2:00 PM)

When I talk to many Republicans about the budget they say,
"who controlled spending from 2007 to present? Democrats."

Could the
Clinton Administration control spending? What part of saying Peyton Manning is a
quarterback for the New York Jets is true?

Once again...play close
attention...it was the Republican-controlled Congress of the 1990's, six of
Bubba's eight years had a Republican Speaker of the House, the last six and most
important, that ruthlessly cut our national security down to the bone.

Those Clinton administration defense cuts were actually
Republican-controlled Congress defense cuts. These defense cuts put this nation
in grave danger and led to 911. This country was unprepared because of the
Republican-controlled Congress defense cuts.

Remember how many of the
Republican presidential contenders in 2008 parroted 'Clinton administration
defense cuts put this country in danger?' All of them my friends!

If
these odious and evidently godless, amoral, malignant, vacuous and contemptible
Republicans are willing to lie about our national security, can they be trusted
about telling the truth in regards to anything?

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Bluebonnet Wrote: 4 hours ago
(2:46 PM)

Thank God for the conservative citizens from all across this
land and their very formidable grass roots efforts for making changes in the
November elections. Perhaps now, we can put a stop to some of the gestapo like
tactics being imposed upon the population from the radical left, their academic
beanies being way too tight! They should invest in truth for a change and not in
the carbon credit exchanges. Investigate that scam for a change of pace!

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Kurt Wrote: 3 hours ago (4:08
PM)

Like Progressive, Liberal, Marxist, Socialist Democrats
don't? Ever hear of Acorn, UAW, SIEU, Huffington Post, NY Times, MSNBC and on
and on and on? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Get a grip young
lady.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

FinalRac Wrote: 7 hours ago
(12:01 PM)

The EPA should be defunded. And now we have a raise in
gasoline taxes for car consumers. On and on it goes. Again, I cry out , Resign
Sir, resign.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

UJustMe Wrote: 6 hours ago
(12:41 PM)

Defunded, Gutted, Eliminated, Neutered, I don't care how the
incoming conservative administration in 2012 deals with it, I just want them to
definitively deal with it. Everything about the EPA is pure, unadulterated
propaganda & the worst part of it is that all ranges of leftists have been
believing their own propaganda for far too many years now.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW
Wrote: 7 hours ago (11:53 AM)

q-r, a political issue to bore you with (much as it has with
haavaad the faux professor);

Why is there the need to 'fix' the world
through GloBull Warming? Where was this idea borne?...

“The common enemy
of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up

with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water
shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are
caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and
behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

" It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a
common adversary to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation
must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy,
either a real one or else one imagined for this purpose"

-- in
The First Global Revolution, by Alexander King, founder of the Club of Rome and
Bertrand Schneider, secretary of the Club of Rome

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

quiet_reason Wrote: 8 hours
ago (10:22 AM)

"this horrifying prediction on computer models that assume
human CO2 and CH4 control our climate – not the sun and dozens of powerful,
complex, interacting natural forces."

Soon makes it sound as though it is
an "either/or" question. It is actually more complicated.

Yes, there are
many complex forcings and interactions that affect our climate. There is no
question that the sun does affect our climate. It has in the past. But that does
not mean that CO2 and, to a lesser extent, CH4 have no effect.

In the
past, the major initiator of climate change has been the sun. We know that
interglacials come along approximately every 100,000 years. This is called the
Milankovitch cycle. They are initiated by changes in the Earth's orbit and
orientation. This causes a warming of the earth and oceans. But the warming of
the sun is not enough to account for the warming that occurred.

Instead,
as the oceans warm solubility of CO2 in water falls. This causes the oceans to
give up more CO2, emitting it into the atmosphere. And it is the increase CO2
that causes the further warming. So both the sun and CO2 are factors in climate
change and CO2 is both an effect and a cause of warming in a complex feedback
mechanism."

Could the sun be responsible for our current climate change?
Data on Solar Irradiance show that the sun has been very quiet since the 70’s
even as our global temperature increases. So, while the sun has been a factor in
the past, it does not appear to be a factor in the current warming.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Michael Wrote: 7 hours ago
(11:21 AM)

It's all poppycock, water vapor is a far more important
greenhouse "gas".
Other less government dependent scientists have long since
debunked the whole theory. The discussion is over.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

quiet_reason Wrote: 7 hours
ago (11:45 AM)

"It's all poppycock, water vapor is a far more important
greenhouse "gas".

Water vapor is a greenhouse "gas" but it is entirely
dependent on temperature, as the climate warms it can hold more water vapor and
this enhances the effect of CO2.

Of course increased water vapor also
means increased clouds and this is still an area of great debate--how do clouds
affect temperature and are they a net positive or negative
feedback?

Sorry you think this is poppycock, you might want to take some
time to actually look at the data. A good place to begin is at NASA's site
http://climate.nasa.gov/.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

There
are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

NOTW Wrote: 7 hours ago
(11:57 AM)

sorry, but a good place to start is not NASA. Hansen is
biased into beleiving from the heart and lack objectiveness.

You have yet
to acknowledge his activism as an issue. I have brought up several times his
flying to the UK last year to speak in defense of criminals that violently took
over a power plant.... A govt official defending criminals....

GRACE has
show to need years of calibration as well. So you cannot cite this new
instrument.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

UJustMe Wrote: 6 hours ago
(12:21 PM)

If you believe that Soon makes it seem as though it is an
either/or scenario, that is just your misinterpretation of what both writers are
putting forth. The overwhelming majority of impact on earth's climate is solar
activity cycles, followed by the earth's own geothermic activity. These two
combined forces account for approximately 96% of the impact that is exerted on
the earth's climate. Correspondingly, the impact of anthropogenic activity,
including the effect/impact of animals (livestock and such) is so infinitesimal
as to be nearly non-existent in the scheme of all that truly is global climate
change. CO2 does nothing but positively impact the vegetation throughout the
world, which subsequently increases oxygen & benefits humans & animals.
It could certainly be made to be more complicated or more simplistic depending
on your own personal ideological agenda, but most people that I know have had
enough of this elitist, "I know better than you peons" attitude from the
lamestream media sources, the Obama administration, ideologues, politicos &
leftists in general. We understand "IT" fine, we're just no longer willing to
buy &/or swallow what you're shoveling.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 6 hours ago
(12:31 PM)

"the science is settled."
~Barack Obama

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 7 hours ago
(11:51 AM)

There are at least 50 such issues with the IPCC models that
are poorly modeled at best.

If you understood computer programming, you
would understand how speculative it is. But you don't. You merely take the party
line.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Gerald Wrote: 6 hours ago
(1:07 PM)

There is no current warming. Has not been for a decade or
more. Over the history of the earth it has been warmer and cooler than now. We
are not in control of the climate. It is a much bigger force than human
activity. The Sun, even without changing its irradiance, is THE biggest factor
in the warming of the earth, to a magnitude of 100 times or more the effect of
humans.

You are like all the other fools who champion changes in
everyone's life style, using curly fry lightbulbs and reduction in use of
available energy. You have bought the Kool Aid of the globe warming and it is
not. If it does, it will not be because of human activity but the multitude of
other factors that have done so since recorded time and temperatures.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

nvbm
Wrote: 10 hours ago (8:39 AM)

---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
Fabulous
surprise. Our company has discount activities recent days. Nike shoes, Jordan
shoes, High heel shoes, dress and so on. If u want, you can get your beloved
thing at its lowest price.
Welcome to

---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

nvbm
Wrote: 10 hours ago (8:39 AM)

---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
Fabulous
surprise. Our company has discount activities recent days. Nike shoes, Jordan
shoes, High heel shoes, dress and so on. If u want, you can get your beloved
thing at its lowest price.
Welcome to

---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------
---------------http://www.clothes2.us---------------------

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

reaganite Wrote: 12 hours ago
(7:06 AM)

Pop-sci has a global warming colum on their website.
Attack-taka-taka-taka-taka-taka-taka-taka.....

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

reaganite Wrote: 12 hours ago
(7:02 AM)

It's an A-barac oil obamago against the U.S.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

reaganite Wrote: 12 hours ago
(6:32 AM)

Tea Party 2 Defund the EPA!
Regulate This! Environmental
scientist and mc's want to fore-shame the human race and keep trying to get
taxpayer funding to do research to prove that global warming is man-made. They
often use volcanic eruptions as an example of how we can cause an ice age with
carbon emissions. LOL -this is often mentioned on documentaries on the discovery
channel and the history channel. They carry on about how the ash contains highly
reflective particles which reflect the suns light back into space away from
Earth.
Just this October twin volcanoes on the Kamchatka Peninsula have been
having major eruptions spewing clouds 33,000 feet into the stratosphere.
In
Addition, Iceland has been erupting for more than a year now and has put so much
smoke into the atmosphere that airlines had to cancel and divert flights as far
south as France.
Suddenly we are having the coldest winters in the history
books. Suddenly the warming alarmist opportunists are trying to attribute the
record cold snaps to man-made global warming.
American’s need to send these
carpet baggers and the EPA this message:
“Humans don’t make volcanoes and we
don’t make them erupt”!
We have been taking a hit on our economy and we’re
throwing your regulation death spiral into the Boston harbor with the rest of
the bureaucratic tea.
Carbon tax and EPA meddling is an absolute waste of our
tax dollars and a total conflict of interest.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

reaganite Wrote: 12 hours ago
(6:33 AM)

Can the EPA regulate a volcanoe! Get real, stop the waste.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW
Wrote: 16 hours ago (2:16 AM)

This planet is dying.
The Human race is killing
it.

So you came here to help us?

No, I didn't....

What are
you saying?

If the Earth dies, you die.
If you die, the Earth
survives.

~dialogue from "The Day the Earth Stood Still", 2006

The
nutty agenda as it is projected in populist media.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Ronald Wrote: 17 hours ago
(1:19 AM)

Good time to invoke the tenth ammenmednt,,,and kick their
butts out of Texas. If they wont go,,,then Texas can secede. We have all of
their oil,, natural gas,,,and Industry,,,why in hell do we need them. We can do
just fine on our own, just shows what good Conservative leadership can
do,,,,Dont believe it,,,look at the Blue states,,,then look at Texas. Even with
no State Income tax we kick all their butts,,," Dont mess with Texas "

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Steve in Phoenix Wrote: 8
hours ago (10:54 AM)

Hugh Hewitt published an article stating that the incoming
chairman Upton on the House Energy committee has sworn to block the EPA on this.
I hope he has the juice to do it.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Edgar Wrote: 18 hours ago
(12:57 AM)

I recall hearing an old phrase: "Don't Mess With
Texas"...

Think that ivy lipped chicago thug will have a prayer if he
tries ignoring that advise?

NOT-

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 18 hours ago
(1:08 AM)

Seems like little TCU showed the nation an example of that
today.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 17 hours ago
(1:13 AM)

actually its purple lipped.

A friend pointed that
out most infamous psychopaths have purple lips. Not sure if that means anything?
(its enough evidence to prove global warming).

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

There
are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Kurt Wrote: 9 hours ago (9:40
AM)

While I have no idea to what you're referring, I sincerely
hope that you understand that in my almost 60 years here on earth, purple lips
meant you are too cold, and only the idiots on the left believe that is due to
global warming.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

stalkinghorse Wrote: 18 hours
ago (12:56 AM)

Environmental Justice...commie code for a 'transfer of
wealth' from Texans to the feds. Fight this we must.

What part of 'stand
down' didn't commie obama get?

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Kurt Wrote: 9 hours ago (9:46
AM)

You assume the Obamanation has a brain...

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Roberty Wrote: 7 hours ago
(11:55 AM)

No, it is not a transfer of wealth from Texas to the Feds or
anyone else. It is a transfer of control and the destruction of an industry. By
allowing the state of the economy to deteriorate sufficiently, we all become
peasants to be ruled over and provided (as the rulers see fit) by the central
government. The collapse of the German mark provided much of the conditions
necessary for the National Socialist Party to come into power.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Douglas Paul Wrote: 19 hours
ago (11:35 PM)

I think if Texas takes on this battle in earnest it will
generate plenty of support and excitement. Now seems a good time to start.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 19 hours ago
(11:43 PM)

Considering that 29 states have turned GOP, and many of
these states are about to join Arizona in illegal alien laws, you're probably
very right.

Amazing to think when one steps back from it all and looks
in. The WH is fighting to break the backs of its very own states. As if they
have a greater agenda. (one that also supports the Club of Rome Haavaad boy,
whereever you went?).

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Douglas Paul Wrote: 19 hours
ago (12:03 AM)

You know when the Times starts putting out articles on it it
is getting legs. I'm sure they don't enjoy reporting
it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/01/us/01immig.html

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Douglas Paul Wrote: 19 hours
ago (11:27 PM)

Ol' Harvard has been reading Popular Science, Discover,
Popular Mechanics, and Cosmos for years now. He's a pretty smart
feller.

It's my fervant wish that Texas flat out refuses to let the
federal government bully them and ignores their attempt to regulate them into
the recession the rest of the country continues to suffer through. States
absolutely need to reassert their rights under the constitution.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 19 hours ago
(11:31 PM)

Yes, their economic growth seems to be thwarting the
agenda... Good point.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Public Citizen Wrote: 19
hours ago (11:24 PM)

Guess Texas should just close the pipelines and switch off
the grid headed north and east.
Since they're holding an energy"Royal Flush"
and all Washington has is "Aces and Eights" (dead mans hand) we'll see who lasts
longest if it comes down to a pissin' contest over energy and allegedly harmful
emissions.
Come to think of it, isn't a significant portion of the national
oil reserve stored under Texas? Or is that oil all under Oklahoma?
Texas has
a lot of undeveloped space to put additional industry, people who don't really
"cotton to being messed with" and a working blueprint in Atlas Shrugged.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Ms
Kelly Wrote: 20 hours ago (10:59 PM)

Going back 30 years or so, scientists have been getting
large government grants to come up with any stats that affirmed the theory of
global warming. This puts all statistics under a banner of suspicion,
particularly any data centers affiliated with the government. John Coleman,
founder of The Weather Channel did a five-part documentary uncovering the
scandals and the money behind them.

Everything below is from the
conservative examiner Feb. 2010:
http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/alert-more-fraud-uncovered-climategate-scandal?render=print

Writing
in Front Page Magazine Dr. Walter E. Williams, professor of economics at George
Mason University, quotes the founder of The Weather Channel, John Coleman, as
saying that not only did certain climate scientists and the IPCC manipulate data
on the weather, BUT SO DID the National Climate Data Center, which is part of
the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Coleman exposes
the shocking fraud in a five-part documentary on this latest revelation
concerning the scandal. Dr. Williams states,

The Coleman documentary
presents research by computer expert E. Michael Smith and Certified Consulting
Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo. During the 1960s and into the 1980s, the number of
stations used for calculating global surface temperatures was about 6,000. By
1990, the number of stations dropped rapidly to about 1,500. Most of the
stations lost were in the colder regions of the Earth. Not adjusting for their
lost made temperatures appear to be higher than was in fact the case. According
to Science & Environmental Policy Project, Russia reported that CRU was
ignoring data from colder regions of Russia, even though these stations were
still reporting data. That means data loss was not simply the result of station
closings but deliberate decisions by CRU to ignore them in order to hype their
global warming claims. D’Aleo and Smith report that our NCDC engaged in similar
deceptive activity where they have dropped stations, particularly in colder
climates, higher elevations or closer to the polar regions. Temperatures are now
simply projected for these colder stations from other stations, usually in
warmer climates.
Thus, no data was received from colder climates. The effect
was a drastically skewed picture of average global temperatures due to lack of
data from cold regions and an overabundance of data from warmer
regions.

Dr. Williams also ventures the irrefutable observation that the
motive for perpetrating such fraud is the 'trillions of dollars and social
control that is at stake' for the vested political and economic
interests.

It's all about the money and the social
control.

ReplyFlag as Offensive Post Comment

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

HARVARD - MIT Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:57 PM)

NOTW...

Boeing flies airplanes because mathematical
modeling produces not certainty but rather a range of probabilities that are
(usually) within bounds of predictable outcomes. Do you think for a moment that
a trest pilot would ever fly a Boeing 747 when first designed absent prediction
modeling? I certainly would not if I were a test pilot.. nor would the
aeronautical engineers.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 20 hours ago
(11:03 PM)

I should remind myself not to give you subterfuge to ignore
the substance you should be commenting on.

Address the political
behaviour of the EPA disregarding empirical data moving forward. Or go to bed.
You have zero debating skills. And you behave like a classic TROLL. (look up the
definition)

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 20 hours ago
(11:05 PM)

prediction modeling... Used by the EPA for actual real time
monitoring instead of real-time data measurements.

So goes the logic
Haaavaad defends. Absolutely brilliant.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

There
are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

NOTW Wrote: 20 hours ago
(11:10 PM)

why do we monitor actuall temperature readings for climate
data if the EPA has decided it can calculate pollutant levels. Seems like NASA
could just figure it out with modeling...

(that was facetious Haavie. No
need to answer unless you offer simple 'proof' of logic. Any man of your
intellect should be able to write the formulaic statement).

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

HARVARD - MIT Wrote: 19 hours
ago (11:14 PM)

EPA will also do sporatic testing to calibrate the
prediction modeling.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 19 hours ago
(11:28 PM)

Again, you fail to explain why prediction modeling is to
used to determine actual pollutant levels happening in real-time. Not
predict...determine. And charge violations based on what the computer output
is.

Logical failure again.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Edgar Wrote: 18 hours ago
(1:10 AM)

About an hour over due, but here goes:

TILT

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 17 hours ago
(1:57 AM)

btw haavaard, I have built airplanes that fly without
computers (not just the cute paper kind).

Its just a tool... A tool of
the fool that wrote the binary code to think linearly. Unfortunately this tool
does not pocess any right brained abilities. Not sure if you do either? The jury
is still out.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Kurt Wrote: 9 hours ago (9:57
AM)

Good sir, what you are saying is we have some very bright
people who make models of predictability. What you don't say is that if they are
bright enough to make the models, they are bright enough to manipulate the
outcomes of the models they create. While not a conspiracy nut, I find a number
of things quite amazing. One is that the data had to be manipulated, fudged,
etc., the other of course is the amazing fact that there are trillions of
dollars to be made from selling carbon credits, that only blue states will gain
from those credits, that you ignore the politics of it is ludicrous, and
finally, you fail to consider that secular scientists, marxist media pundits,
and those who stand to gain are the ones pushing this bs. Now I assume from your
net-name you're well read so please remember the famous exerpt "all pigs are
created equal but some are created more equal than others." Good day to you.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

AKA
Deerhunter Wrote: 20 hours ago (10:52 PM)

Harvard - you've been here for hours - for what reason? Are
you really that much of a lonely loser? Do you think and care whether anonymous
strangers on this thread are impressed with you? Do you think pretending to be
associated with a snobbish overrated university will give you some sort of
intellectual clout? We don't respect you - we pity you for the shallow,
fictitious existence you are living.

My guess is that you are such a
failure in real life that you have resorted to a cyber identity that you think
is achieving some sort of respect you desperately crave. Sorry bud - your just a
phony loser - which you know to be the truth.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

HARVARD - MIT Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:53 PM)

AKA DEERHUNTER...

Think again.. my frined.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

AKA Deerhunter Wrote: 20
hours ago (10:58 PM)

Bye Harvard - unlike you - I have better things to do.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Christopher Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:49 PM)

After reading the article and reading all the posts below,
it's amazing how little the posts resemble a discussion of the points made in
the article. Both points of view seem to make very few issues relating to
scientific facts and evidence and have devolved into shouting (metaphorically
speaking) epithets at each other. Not a good way to convince someone that your
viewpoint is the truth, or even less wrong than the other person's point of
view. It all seems rather silly.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 20 hours ago
(10:59 PM)

Well Christopher, if you're looking for real debate with
Haaavaaad, good luck. Plenty of relevant issues posted. He yawns or feigns
superior knowledge with no substance.

At some point, ridicule and
disrespect is all he has earned in response to his inane response. Playing down
and dumb at his level is his choice.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

RamonAdams Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:44 PM)

Well, we don't read the Gray Lady much in Texas, but it is
purchased and serves a useful purpose.
After one of our infrequent rains we
find it useful to place it our doorway. You know, so we can step on it, because
these are the Times that dry men's soles.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW
Wrote: 20 hours ago (10:35 PM)

Havaad, if he actually is a computer programming ( he has
yet to show any intellect to suggest that ), then he would appreciate the EPA's
new regulatory tool.

They have computer models to speculate pollutant
level discharged from entities like power plants, etc. They will no longer rely
on empirical measurements to determine violations. (Even though the computer
models should be validated be empirical correlation)....

This is a
failure of logic and common sense in return for control. The elites of Haaavaaad
have decided this. That is partly why Texas is suing them.

Haavie, You
will be badgered from this day forth to stop being a wus.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

HARVARD - MIT Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:47 PM)

NOTW...

Prediction modeling is quite common and well
established element of mathematical science. It is used in many areas such as
the airplane you last flew on of which all tests are not able to be conducted in
wind tunnels. We also use prediction modeling for nuclear reactors and thousands
of other things. It turns out they are quite accurate when compared with long
term emperical data.

Modeling... not as evil as you
believe.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

NOTW Wrote: 20 hours ago
(10:52 PM)

The problem you fail to grasp there Haavie is that there is
real-time empirical data available to determine any chemical levels. No modeling
needed. Just the common sense of reality.

You see their way means they
can dispute reality. Much like you do. Haavaad grads are losing credibility
quickly around here.

btw, Boeing still goes out and flies a new plane
around for quite a while after the model said it would fly error free. Or would
you rather they just stick them in the airport after the computer said it was
okay?

Your EQ is well below 100 despite whatever your IQ may be.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

There
are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

HARVARD - MIT Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:57 PM)

NOTW...

Boeing flies airplanes because mathematical
modeling produces not certainty but rather a range of probabilities that are
(usually) within bounds of predictable outcomes. Do you think for a moment that
a trest pilot would ever fly a Boeing 747 when first designed absent prediction
modeling? I certainly would not if I were a test pilot.. nor would the
aeronautical engineers.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

HARVARD - MIT Wrote: 20 hours
ago (10:33 PM)

MATT...

I think I knew that at around the same age
when at forteen I held a general HAM license along with an FCC 1st Class
RadioTelephone License with radar endorsement.

Presently I know quite a
bit more about reactances, AC and DC circuits, S Parameters and many other
things we teach at Harvard and MIT (and far more for those post docs and
qualified grad students who dare take one of my courses... failure rate is
40%)

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Matt Wrote: 20 hours ago
(10:36 PM)

I thought you were going to sleep. Oh, wait. . .you ARE
asleep. That explains a lot.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Matt Wrote: 20 hours ago
(10:39 PM)

Oh, man. Now I have that image stuck in my head. ("Stay
thirsty, my students.")

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

There
are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

NOTW Wrote: 20 hours ago
(10:41 PM)

He feigns superiority in his sleep...

He thinks of
himself as "the most interesting geek in the world."

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

Matt Wrote: 20 hours ago
(10:53 PM)

NOTW: My post above was meant as a reply to "the most
interesting geek in the world," but somehow it ended up in the wrong place --
with an *earlier* time stamp than your post. I think that TH may be experiencing
technical difficulties.

Login to
Reply

Flag as
Offensive

Post Comment

« Previous12345678Next
»

New
comments on this article - click to
refresh

Commentary Archives

Browse by Author

Browse by
Subject

Browse by
Date

Bill O'Reilly:
The Truth About Grit

Doug Giles:
2011 Resolution: Annoy the Left 365

Debra J.
Saunders: Intimidation and Tyranny

Austin Hill:
Why Do Democrats Keep Talking About the Birth Certificate?

Salena Zito:
Obama: Minus 2.0

Niger Innis:
Driving US Families Into Poverty

Adam Hasner:
Balance the Budget Before We Drown in Debt

Paul Jacob:
Big stories, made and missed

Katie Gage:
Obama Administration Closes Year Paying Off Big Labor

Paul Driessen:
EPA's Texas Power Grab

Kyle Olson:
Charge NYC Union Leaders With Negligent Homicide

Janice Shaw
Crouse: Are Your Children Accessing Porn in Your Home?

more

Video

Obama’s 2011 Message: ‘Shared Responsibilities’

Is Liberal Media Promoting Mike Huckabee for GOP in 2012?

Conservative Tucker Carlson Thinks Michael Vick Should Be
Executed

Comparison: Gas Prices Under Bush, Obama

The Left-wing Attitude Toward the Military
Kevin
Glass

Ending the Year with a Rueful Laugh
Carol Platt
Liebau

Townhall Magazine: Top 20 Stories of 2010
Chris Field

Top Ten of 2010!
Townhall.com Staff

Bloomberg Bust
Carol Platt Liebau

TSA: Your Safety Is Our Priority
Helen Whalen
Cohen

SusanAnne
Hiller

Kirsten
Powers Fesses Up; The Hill and Politico Silent on Truth about Bush Veto
Override

Ed
Morrissey

Video:
Filibuster under attack in new session?

Ed
Morrissey

Kaine:
Obama too busy with ObamaCare to deal with job creation

Ed
Morrissey

NFL
week 17 open thread

Jazz
Shaw

France’s
Le Monde Names Assange Man of the Year

SusanAnne
Hiller

Video:
Kirsten Powers says Bush 2008 veto of bill with end-of-life provision “not
true”

more

Townhall Regular Contributers

Ann Coulter

Thomas
Sowell

Walter E.
Williams

Jillian
Bandes

Mike Adams

John Stossel

Michelle
Malkin

Chuck Norris

John Hawkins

Dennis
Prager

Mike
Gallagher

Hugh Hewitt

Michael
Medved

Robert
Morrison

Michael
Barone

Joseph C.
Phillips

Pat Buchanan

Ken
Blackwell

Jonah
Goldberg

Oliver North

Brent Bozell

Larry Kudlow

Michael
Reagan

Victor Davis
Hanson

Larry Elder

Cal Thomas

Tony
Blankley

David
Limbaugh

About Townhall

|

Become a Partner

|

Advertise

|

Privacy Policy

|

Radio Stations

|

Sitemap

|

Jobs

|

Contact Us:

Townhall | Conservative Columnists | Election Results | Tipsheet | Conservative News | Political Cartoons | Talk Radio Conservative Video | Photos | Community | Issues in Politics | Townhall Magazine | Finance | Townhall
Radio

abortion immigration global warming congress Barack Obama Sarah Palin Townhall Magazine 2010 taxes health care 2012

war on terror Afganistan Iraq Iran Israel Glenn Beck Fox News second ammendment spending Constitution labor unions

elections Tea Party environment marriage energy Christianity culture courts faith Supreme Court

Chris Christie national security jobs economy finance MSM defense education Hollywood Founding Fathers Islam foreign affairs

Read the latest conservative news and political commentary from the #1
conservative news source - Townhall.com. Stay up to date with news headlines,
political news, and conservative opinion with Townhall columnists including Ann
Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Bill O'Reilly, Dick Morris, Ken Blackwell, Michael
Barone, Charles Krauthammer, Star Parker, Dennis Prager, Thomas Sowell, George
Will, and many more of your favorite conservatives. Get your fix of funny
political cartoons full or satire and political humor from editorial cartoonists
including Michael Ramirez, Glenn McCoy, and Henry Payne. Townhall.com also
features the latest news videos and pictures on the latest political hot topics.
Get the lastest news on hot topics including health care reform, the economy,
immigration, government tax, President Obama, Sarah Palin, Iraq, Arizona
politics, gay marriage laws, and many more big news issues. As an extension of
Townhall.com, Townhall Magazine offers more than what you find online. Our
conservative magazine coverage features investigative journalism, in-depth
reporting, heavily researched analysis, interviews with the heavy hitters and
powerful exposés - all in a monthly news and opinion journal from the same team
of right-thinking reporters, opinions makers, insiders and political leaders
conservatives have trusted for 15 years. In addition to being the leader news
source for conservatives, Townhall provides the latest business and finance news
at Townhall Finance. Get up to date stock market numbers, financial advice, and
track your investments in your stock portfolio. Townhall - Your Source for
Conservative News, Cartoons, Issues, Blogs, Finance & Magazine.

Townhall.com Stuff

Copyright © Townhall.com. All Rights Reserved. Terms under
which this service is provided to you