Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Global warming is a scam.

Anyone remember Earth Day about 35 years ago? Remember how Liberals warned us that using aerosol cans was leading to a big hole in the ozone layer that would bring about global cooling and eventually an ice age? Remember how they had peer reviewed scientific reports with temperature data going back as far as the 1900's showing that the average temp is going down? Why if we didn't stop using those evil aerosol cans, and maybe switched to alternatives that they held stock in and purchased aerosol credits (which they were happy to sell to us) it would offset the aerosol we were putting into the air. Russian scientists warn that the globe is cooling, not warming

but the USA and Europe scientists claim it is warming and not cooling. Chinese scientists show the globe is cooling down and newspaper scans proving that scientists warned about global cooling more than 35 years ago and that scientists argued over if the world was cooling into an ice age.

Well today they are using the same data, only this time, get this, it shows that the average temp is going up instead of down. That if we don't stop using fossil fuels and buy carbon credits the world is going to get way too hot and turn into a desert. Lucky for us, they are able to sell us alternative energy solutions as well as those carbon credits so we won't feel guilty about ruining the planet. Apparently it seems that Selling carbon credits has become quite profitable more profitable than issuing stock and bonds. Many companies big and small and many individuals who are pro-global warming seem to be making billions if not trillions off of this sale of carbon credits.

Think about this logically, how can the same data show that the world is cooling and warming at the same time? I smell a rat, lots of rats, and they seem to be calling themselves scientists but they smell a whole lot like politicians to me. 2500 PHDs, yet I found that a lot of them hold PHDs in political science or some other field than climate science or weather. This is the false authority fallacy, you take people who are from a different field and you claim they are experts in the field you are trying to fool people with. For example, you might take a Football player who is an expert in sports, and try to pass him off as an expert on Opera event if he cannot speak the language used in the Opera. You might take an Actor, for example, and then claim he is an expert in Politics despite having no political experience. (This actually happens a lot in Hollywood) You might take someone with a PHD in History, and then claim he is an Expert in Medicine because he has a PHD and is called a Doctor despite having no medical experience. Yet in global warming, politicians are seen as experts like Al Gore despite Al Gore's bachelors being in government and his poor grades in science classes all of a sudden Al Gore is supposed to be an expert like he has a PHD in Science, yet the man clearly has no PHD in science and his test results showed that he had poor grades in chemistry and physics and other sciences. Gloabl warming is more political than factual.

Wow, Hammer, this sounds like a big scam to me, but what about all of those peer reviewed scientific studies? Those 2500+ scientists who tell us that global warming is real?

Simple, they screwed up the statistics and when they peer reviewed it they made the same statistical errors or overlooked it or just signed it off without even bothering to see if it was true because they too are pro-global warming politicians. Well how can you prove that? Simple, if the statistical data fits a bell curve you use a z-score test if not you use a t-score test for the hypothesis. The global warming data does not fit the bell curve yet they used the z-score test on it anyway, which is a fallacy. When testing the hypothesis using the t-score test, the hypothesis fails. Well then people, what happens when the hypothesis fails, yes the theory fails as well. Yet there is more evidence of wrongdoing and scams and lies and politics. Every statistical test will show you the margin of error, right? Yet the global warming tests don't list the margin of error. Why? Because it shows that the test has a margin of error that shows that the results could be misleading or incorrect. Every honest statistical test will show the margin of error, and if it does not, it is dishonest and you should not trust it. Every scientist should know that, but these guys are mostly political scientists and appear not to know that. A collection of scientific proof against global warming

shows that a lot of these political scientists have faked the data.

You will find that many of them own stock in oil and energy companies like Al Gore does, so when they put the global warming scare on people, it causes the price of oil and other energy to go up. Isn't that a bit like manipulating the market and insider trading? Then they lay that guilt trip on everyone. "Your carbon footprint is too big! You are putting out too much CO2, and it is going to doom us all in 30 years when you have 110 degrees Fahrenheit in the spring and summer months." Oh golly, the average person is upset because they own a SUV, and they have incandescent light bulbs and not LEDs or florescent lights. Just like the Roman Catholic church had a big scam in the middle ages of paying money for one's sins in order to get into Heaven, the pro-global warming people offer carbon credits for sale to help us get rid of our guilt for being a CO2 hog. Global warming is the doomsday story of Secular Humanism trying to force people to convert to their religion by abusing science to force their views and opinions on everyone and discrediting anyone who disagrees with them. Very much like any religion might have done. Science has been hijacked by Secular Humanists, Atheists, Ultra-Liberal Politicians, and pushed out real scientists over 40 years ago. Modern science is not real science any more, but just another religion? Why? Because the public is forced to believe in theories being true or have faith that they are true, and science was never about belief or faith and when it is, then it is just another religion.

Say, you don't think that these pro-global warming people are getting rich off of global warming, do you? Well I do, and I have just proved it. It is a scam, and a very good one at that because a lot of people are buying into it, and pro-global warming people are making billions if not trillions off of it. If these 2500+ scientists are getting rich off of global warming, don't you think that makes their peer reviewed studies sort of biased and gives them a motive to lie about them in order to get rich off of the research and the guilt they lay on people for global warming to force them to buy things to make the pro-global warming people richer? It is the global warming conspiracy and those 2500+ scientists are in on the conspiracy.

Yes, transferring dollars of the poor and middle-class people to the worlds richest liberals is the ideal way to fix global climate problems. If we make the world's richest liberals even richer then all of that hot air CO2 will magically go away.

In fact when independent scientists peer review the findings of pro-global warming scientists they often find flaws and statistical errors in the reports like I do. Anyone with a bachelors of science and classes in statistics and research like I have, can find those flaws and errors quite easily and show that the numbers have been fudged.

Even someone with a bachelors of science and elementary statistics and research classes can detect these errors, mistakes, flaws, fallacies, and see how the data was fudged in the many reports out on the Internet. It does not take a chef to see that a cake has fallen flat and it does not take a PHD in Natural Science to see the flaws, mistakes, errors, fallacies, and that the scientific method was not followed in these global warming reports. I myself never claimed to be superior to anyone, all I claim is that I found these things in various global warming reports on the Internet.

The NOAA is used quite a lot for research, they are part of the US Chamber of Commerce and more political and economical than scientific. Their findings did not follow the scientific method. There was no control and experiment groups, no dependent and independent variables either. Thus proving that the scientific method was not followed, which is common for most political groups and politicians. In fact The NOAA Geospatial Data and Climate Services Group has been discontinued for some reason. It used to show organizations that partnered up with the NOAA to collect the environmental and climate data, and most of them were making profits out of promoting global warming. Apparently part of some cover up in order to fool people into thinking that real unbiased third party scientists have collected the data and made the conclusions.

In fact the NOAA provides fudged numbers in hopes of proving more commerce to bring more income to alternative energy and carbon credits by spreading the global warming scam with false experts and false data to be used in various pro-global warming web sites and be used by thousands of pro-global warming scientists.
Data collected and used by the Russians and the Saudis show that global warming is false, but pro-global warming con-artists quickly dismiss those findings or ignore that they exist. In fact any scientific report that shows global warming is false is often discredited and the people behind the report have smear campaigns launched against them with personal attacks. Thus proving the politics behind global warming. For example the AMS threatened to decertify any weather person who refused to believe that global warming is true or showed any form of skepticism. Thus proving that global warming is being forced on the public. Because of this forcing of the theory on the public, it must be met with resistance and the people doing the forcing need to be exposed as the fraud that they are and what a scam they are trying to promote. The IPCC is promoted as the holy bible of global warming, yet bases a lot of data on NOAA, which has already been proven to be fudged and biased. Anyone who disagrees with the IPCC or global warming is labeled as an heretic and pariah and has a smear campaign launched at them and discredits them.

Related Links:
Global Warming Skepticism Part II: Of Oceans And Atmospheres

A question about global warming

Science and global warming

The diary that spawned this story

Is global warming really that important?

More global warming

What it would cost to stop global warming if it was true

The global warming hoax

The coldest winter ever recorded in Russia

Russian scientists warn that the globe is cooling, not warming

Global warming is junk science

Global Mean Temperature

Manmade global warming?

Collection of scientific proof against global warming

Gloabl warming is more political than factual

GLobal warming is lies, claims documentary

Newspaper scans proving that scientists warned about global cooling more than 35 years ago

I think these links more than prove that global warming is a scam.

Monday, February 26, 2007

Why we are losing the war on terror

It began early on, a nation united is a very powerful and unbeatable thing. Abraham Lincoln said that a house divided among itself cannot stand during the Civil War. During World War II FDR had united the USA in the war effort. Both Republican and Democratic Presidents agree that the USA needs to be united against a common enemy.

So why aren't the USA united against a common enemy anymore and are fighting ourselves? Seriously WTF?

The answer is that the Liberals divided us, the Secular Progressives as well. At first they supported the war, and then they found excuses not to support it. They divided a nation when it needed to be united. They sabotaged the war effort and in doing so gave aid and support to the enemy, the terrorists the enemy of all humanity. Voting down body armor and voting down funding to train Iraqis to take the place of US troops. Creating blogs and editorial newspaper sites that have a constant Anti-USA ranting and raving. Secular Progressives like Rosie O'Donnell took the Islamic Terrorists as a cheap shot against Radical Christians who are not into terrorism at all. When all of these things started to happen, we begun to lose the war on terror. They keep on attacking by any means necessary, these Benedict Arnolds, these backstabbers. These attention whores like Cindy Sheehan who uses her son's corpse to promote her own biased political agenda with no regard on how it effects men and women in the US Military and lowers their moral and makes it easier for the enemy to kill them so more mothers can join her in suffering a loss of a child.

Do these people even think before they act? Do they really know the consequences of their actions and behaviors and the bad decisions they keep making that have doomed us all?

Use peaceful protests like Gandhi and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. used, the Liberals are using the wrong tactics. This is only making things worse.

Now that we know Iraq wasn't connected to 9/11 attacks or had WMDs, we need to pull out troops from Iraq and put them in Afghanistan or bring some of them home. Liberals are not going to accomplish that by name calling, getting violent, using personal attacks and other fallacies, and sabotaging the war effort. Some of these Liberals in giving help and aid to the enemy are the real war criminals. But lucky for them the Bush Administration does not care if they are, and doesn't stop them from protesting.

We need a change in this nation, we need hope, we don't need a lot of negativity and back stabbing. I expect more out of Liberals and hope the next Democratic President does better and fights this war better or at least resolves it. I got a feeling since the Bush Administration is so unpopular that the next President will be a Democrat. We can do better as a nation than we are now.