06/29/2012 5 Comments
H/T to Power Line Blog for the Cartoon.
Monitoring the political pulse for 2012 and anything else that tickles my interest.
06/28/2012 53 Comments
The Supreme Court has upheld the Obama Care Individual Mandate, not under the Commerce Clause, but under the ability of the government to levy regressive taxes until the citizens rebel. While Obama is doing a victory lap, Tea Party Patriots across the nation are organizing to oppose all the liberals that voted for Obama Care. Since Obama said he would not raise Middle Class taxes, he is now vulnerable and should be sent packing.
If you choose not to pay this new regressive tax, the IRS will take your property and send you to the poor house to join the 49% who do not pay any taxes. This new tax has given the Republican one of the strangest issues yet! The worlds largest tax increase in the history of the United States.
We must remove Obama Care and kill the largest unprecedented tax increase on the middle class in history. Our only hope to save America from government rationing of health care and certain bankruptcy is to force Congress to repeal this horrific law, which steals our personal freedom.
See you all at the next Tea Party Patriot Meeting! Come and march with us in the Forth of July Parade, details to be posted HERE.
Update (06-28-12, 10:1) The Polipundit has some ponts to ponder:
Update (o6-28-12, 10:20) How much of a tax increase? About $1.7 trillion over the first decade, according to the CBO.
Obama’s tax pledge of 2008:
“I can make a firm pledge – under my plan, no family making less that $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase,” he said in a September 2008 campaign speech in New Hampshire.
Prior to Obamacare’s passage in 2010, Obama denied it was a tax. In September 2009, Obama told ABC News that the law “is absolutely not a tax increase.”
The court has converted Obama Care into a huge tax increase which just may also boost the GOP’s ability to persuade voters to back GOP candidates in 2012. Romney raised over $100,000 in less than an hour after the SCOTUS decision. How much will it be by the end of the day? Stay tuned.
06/28/2012 1 Comment
One thing I have learned in my study of climate change and the underlying statistics is that that selection of the starting and ending points in the data set can influence the out come. David Whitehouse has a perfect example from a poster session at the Taking the Temperature of the Earth Conference. Schneider et al 2012 took the temperature of 169 large inland lakes around the world using satellite IR photos.
According to their findings the surface temperatures of these water bodies have been “rapidly warming” with an average rate of 0.350 ± 0.11 deg C per decade for the period 1985–2010.
Here is the chart showing their findings.
When I first read the article I noted the flat top on the data starting about 1997/98 and just eyeballed the trend line from that point to the present, and I could not see any trend. Yes, there was warming, from 1980 1998, but none from that point on.
David Whitehouse at the Global Warming Policy Foundation also note that flat top and did some additional analysis, and here is his plot.
As you can see, the starting point makes a big difference in the outcome. From 1977 to 1997 the the Northern Hemisphere climate was being influenced by a warm phase PDO, which ended about 1998, which can account for some of the warming. The sun as still very active, and could have had some influence. Starting in 2000 solar cycle 23 started a slow decline. Historically a quite sun, with fewer sunspot, has resulted in a cooler earth.
Whitehouse concludes: No statistically significant trend post-1997. Since 1997 the data is best represented by a straight line of mean 0.21 deg with a large standard deviation of 0.95 deg. Below is the post-1997 portion of the researcher’s graph. It is easy to see that the trendline calculated from the 1985-2011 data does not fit this section of the data in which there is no trend.
06/27/2012 Leave a comment
Three federal judges, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, admit to being biased in favor of a government agency when granting a landmark decision in favor of caps and taxes on “greenhouse gas” emissions. The Court rules the Earth’s atmosphere acts like a greenhouse after all.
No really, these idiots think there is a ceiling in our atmosphere and that carbon dioxide is a “pollutant.” John Sullivan has the details:
The EPA now has the legal green light to pursue those related environmental policies of President Obama. Obama, up for re-election later this year, already failed to drive carbon dioxide (CO2) limiting legislation through Congress earlier in his presidency. Now he has succeeded by other means via the EPA regulations that had previously determined CO2 is a “pollutant” via the Clean Air Act.
On Page 16 the Decision reads, “We begin with a brief primer on greenhouse gases. As their name suggests, when released into the atmosphere, these gases act “like the ceiling of a greenhouse, trapping solar energy and retarding the escape of reflected heat.”
You can read the rest of Sullivan’s article HERE. He concludes:
In a “real” court we would honest judges would prefer to show bias to actual physical evidence rather than biased administrators, self-serving bureaucrats and their dodgy computer models. Instead, the federal court performed a cop-out and endorsed a fellow arm of federal government (the EPA). This ruling was entirely one-sided and pro-alarmist proving once again that the lunatics and tax-craving bureaucrats are running the U.S. government asylum. Roll on voting day!
This action by a Count that admits their bias, makes the election in November extremely important. We need to clean house and get back to real science at the EPA. This decision will be soundly critiqued by the skeptical community of scientists. Stay tuned for an Update.
06/27/2012 2 Comments
“The former buzz words ‘environment’ and ‘climate change’ have disappeared … now it’s all about “social justice” with “collectives” that will tell you what you want or should do.”
Who knew, it was never about changing the climate, it was really about wealth distribution. You can read the full report in the Canada Free HERE. The article by Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser concludes:
The Agenda Shift
The agenda shift from the original Eco-92 gathering in Rio (1992), i.e. “global warming” to “climate change” to “environmental justice” to “social justice” happened slowly, but it was a long-term goal by its ideologists all along. By now it’s all about “social justice” with “collectives” that will tell you what you want or should do. The former buzz words ‘environment’ and ‘climate change’ have disappeared too.
Moreover, with the previously touted “Global Warming” scare, supposedly due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, rapidly being exposed as the greatest scientific hoax since “Piltdown Man” certainly does not help its cause either. However, the new deity, “social justice” also comes with its own set of conundrums.
In the end, it all boils down to a simple question: What would you rather have, the subsistence lifestyle of the peasant farmer or the conveniences of the modern city dweller? The answer is obvious from a simple fact:
The majority of the 45,000 activists attending Rio+20 had not gone there by dug-out canoe!
Now what are our local lefty defenders of global warming and climate change going to say? Social Justice will not burn down our houses, just drain our bank accounts. What will CARB do now that we know it was not climate change but wealth distribution and social justice? Oh, Cap and Trade is wealth distribution from your bank account to a democrat controlled slush fund!
06/27/2012 4 Comments
His Purpleness has taken note that Stockton is going bankrupt, but it does not have much to do with unfunded liabilities, it was just a bad economy.
Editor’s note: As expected, Stockton is going to become the nation’s largest city to seek bankruptcy protection. Though a cautionary tale, I’d warn readers to be leery about sweeping statements that this could be a widespread trend. Yup, it will happen again. But it also will be politicized by political “fear mongers.” In addition, a lot of Stockton’s problems stemmed from the real estate collapse (a “revenue” problem) and millions of dollars of debt on overly ambitious development projects, not just a problem with public unions and pensions. Context is extremely important when analyzing a trend.
Yes, context is important. According to a Fox News Report yesterday 20% of California cities and counties are on the verge of similar bankruptcy problems, including Los Angles and San Francisco. We will soon have an opportunity to see the books for all California cites, counties and other agencies according to the WSJ:
Accounting rule makers approved a series of changes Monday that will shine a harsher light on the troubles of public-employee pension plans, boosting their reported obligations by possibly hundreds of billions of dollars.
The new rules by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board will force pension plans to show their funding shortfalls more prominently and calculate their obligations in ways that will make some underfunded plans look even weaker. Pension plans will also have to record their costs sooner than they do now, among many other changes.
Closer to home, these new accounting rules will soon expose the “rural myth” of Nevada County’s unfunded liabilities. According to Rick Haffey writing in a Union Other Voices, June 1, 2012 the county’s unfunded liability is $119 million. If a discount rate of 3.9%, which PERS uses for some purposes as of September 2011, rather than the 7.75% used to calculate the $119 million liability, then the unfunded liability of the County doubles. Oops.
As a very knowledgable local observer writes:
The key, of course, is the use of a realistic discount rate in the Present Value calculation. Not mentioned is if the realistic discount rate is applied to the unfunded liability only or if it was applied to the complete liability. At one time, when the draft GASB standard was being circulated the compromise suggested was to apply the new rate to the unfunded portion only.
When this liability is moved to the visible part of a financial statement will it impact the borrowing cost of all agencies.
Stay Tuned, this story will have more legs as the unfunded liabilities go on the books, shattering all those “rural myths.”
06/26/2012 5 Comments
Wired News has the story:
Apple is looking to expand its data center empire with a new computing facility just outside of Reno, Nevada.
On Tuesday, the Reno Gazette-Journal reported that Apple is planning to build a data center east of Sparks, Nevada as part of a project that would see the company pump $1 billion into the state’s economy over the next 10 years.
Alongside the other giants of the web — including Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft — Apple is now building its own computing facilities in an effort to keep up with rising internet traffic — and cut down on costs. Like the company’s data center in Maiden, North Carolina and the facility it’s currently building in Prineville, Oregon, its Nevada data center would house Apple’s various online services, such as the iTunes Store, the App Store, and its iCloud data storage and syncing services.
Now, my question is why not California? Oh, unreliable alternative energy power, with costs going through through the roof!
06/25/2012 6 Comments
Antarctic ice shelves not melting at all, new field data show — Crafty boffins got elephant seals to survey for them
Details at the UK Register:
Twenty-year-old models which have suggested serious ice loss in the eastern Antarctic have been compared with reality for the first time – and found to be wrong, so much so that it now appears that no ice is being lost at all.
“Previous ocean models … have predicted temperatures and melt rates that are too high, suggesting a significant mass loss in this region that is actually not taking place,” says Tore Hattermann of the Norwegian Polar Institute, member of a team which has obtained two years’ worth of direct measurements below the massive Fimbul Ice Shelf in eastern Antarctica – the first ever to be taken.
According to a statement from the American Geophysical Union, announcing the new research:
It turns out that past studies, which were based on computer models without any direct data for comparison or guidance, overestimate the water temperatures and extent of melting beneath the Fimbul Ice Shelf. This has led to the misconception, Hattermann said, that the ice shelf is losing mass at a faster rate than it is gaining mass, leading to an overall loss of mass.
You can read the rest of the article HERE, but this is the conclusion (my emphasis added)
Overall, according to the team, their field data shows “steady state mass balance” on the eastern Antarctic coasts – ie, that no ice is being lost from the massive shelves there. The research is published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.
This is good news indeed, as some had thought that huge amounts of ice were melting from the region, which might mean accelerated rates of sea level rise in future.
The National Academy of Scientist study of sea level rise is based on computer models and here is proof that the computer models are in error. Now will the NAS study be with drawn or revised. Not likely, as sea level alarmism is more about politics rather than scientific truth.
06/24/2012 1 Comment
This second third day of summer the Sun is blank. No sunspots except for a small blemish in the lower right. The real question of for how long will the vanishing sunspot remain in hiding?
06/24/2012 8 Comments
I have discussed sea level rise along the coast of California in past blog posts HERE and HERE, and have received several e-mails alerting me to a recent National Academy of Scientist report for the Department of Water Resources. There were some alarmist articles in the San Francisco Chronicle and San Jose Mercury News. I was going to write another post exposing the weakness of the NAS arguments, but Willis Eschenbach in a guest post at Watts Up With That has done an excellent job of debunking runaway sea level rise in a highly visible way.
Figure 1. 160 years of sea level observations in San Francisco, California. Source: PSMSL
San Francisco has one of the longest continuous sea level records in the US. As you can see, there’s nothing too remarkable about the record. It is worth noting, however, that over the last 160 years the sea level in San Francisco has gone up by about 8 inches (20 cm) … and there are 12 inches in a foot (30 cm). It is also worth noting that during the last couple of decades it has hardly risen at all.
So what does the National Academy of Sciences projection of a one foot rise by 2030 look like?
Figure 2. High end projection of the National Academy of Sciences for the 2030 sea level in San Francisco.
This sudden sea level rise is based on computer modeled global warming which ignores that the earth has not been warming for the last 13-15 years depending on where you chose the starting point. The Sun is in the lowest sup spot cycle in 100 years and it appears the current cycle is peaking and will be declining. Historically the earth has cooled when the Sun spots decline. NASA has forecast that Cycle 25 will be lower than Cycle 24 which was the lowest in 100 years. With the earth cooling it is highly unlikely that Arctic glaciers and Antarctic snow pack will be rapidly melting in the next 18 years, or that the seas will expand in a cooling world.
The next time you see a National Academy of Science Report on climate change do not giggle, it might contain a fact or two, or maybe not!
Update (06-24-12, 14:59) Sean raises the question in the comments about the connection between sea level rise and the Ap Index with is a good indicator of solar sunspot activity. This graphic does not support that view unless some lag time is considered.
There appears to be some lag time between drop in Ap Index and sea level decline. Any thoughts?
06/23/2012 2 Comments
The CNSNews has the details here:
(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration distributed $9 billion in economic “stimulus” funds to solar and wind projects in 2009-11 that created, as the end result, 910 “direct” jobs — annual operation and maintenance positions — meaning that it cost about $9.8 million to establish each of those long-term jobs.
At the same time, those green energy projects also created, in the end, about 4,600 “indirect” jobs – positions indirectly supported by the annual operation and maintenance jobs — which means they cost about $1.9 million each ($9 billion divided by 4,600).
Combined (910 + 4,600 = 5,510), the direct and indirect jobs cost, on average, about $1.63 million each to produce.
As explained in a report by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which is part of the U.S. Department of Energy, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“economic stimulus”) of 2009 included Section 1603, a grant program run through the Treasury Department.
And you wondered why the economy is going back in to recession? California’s continued focus on renewable energy is going increase the cost of energy and that will force business to seek lower cost locations, taking jobs with them.
06/23/2012 2 Comments
Our local blog aggregator still continues to label this blog and those that do not conform to the “global warming consensus” as deniers, which is not a scientific term. See Denialism/Climate contrarians
The use of the term ‘denier’ in scientific literature is being debated at Watts Up With That and at Jo Nova’s Blog. This debate deserves the attention of thoughtful readers, especially the local promoter of this misleading terminology, although I have serious doubts that she will invest the time and mental energy. There are some very insightful thoughts by Dr Robert Brown, starting with this very small excerpt:
Please understand that by creating a catch-all label like this [denier], you quite literally are moving the entire discussion outside of the realm of science, where evidence and arguments are considered and weighed independent of the humans that advance them, where our desire to see one or another result proven are (or should be) irrelevant, where people weigh the difficulty of the problem being addressed as an important contributor (in a Bayesian sense) to how much we should believe any answer proposed — so far, into the realm where people do not think at all! They simply use a dismissive label such as “denier” and hence avoid any direct confrontation with the issues being challenged.
I recommend that everyone interested in the issue of anthropogenic climate change read Dr Brown’s eloquent and insightful comments, as they are worthy of your consideration. More HERE.
06/22/2012 4 Comments
This caught my eye on Drudge:
However it was not our Nevada City, just North Las Vegas.
Maybe our Nevada City is out of money: This is from the BOS Agenda:
Auditor-Controller: Marcia Salter
46. Resolution authorizing and directing the Treasurer of the County of Nevada to temporarily
transfer funds in the amount of $678,000 to the City of Nevada City to meet the obligations
incurred for operation and maintenance of the City through April 26, 2012. The 2012/13
property tax remittance to the City for December 2012 and April 2013 allocations will be
reduced by the Auditor-Controller in an amount equal to fifty percent of the authorized
temporary borrow amount. Such repayment shall be with an interest charge at the Treasurer’s
pooled interest rate plus 0.5% for an administrative charge.
06/20/2012 Leave a comment
Ackerman is moving to Oregon, getting out of California before the AB-32 crap hits the fan. Wise move for a supporter of the great global warming hoax. George Rebane has the details on Jeff ‘s departure HERE.
I may have to subscribe to the Roseburg News-Review just to see if he can fill his new content and revenue creation mission. Should be an interesting year. Stay Tuned.
Not everyone has the save views on Jeff’s escape to Oregon. Check out the comments at The Crabb Man’s blog: http://www.rlcrabb.com/general/goodbye-jeff-ackerman/
06/20/2012 4 Comments
Britain was a major leaders in the go green movement, often cited by our former governor as an example to follow. Here are some of the reactions to the Rio+20 Summit Final Report from the Global Warming Policy Foundation Newsletter:
Green NGOs and charities claim that the text produced by the Rio+20 negotiators from 193 countries is so weak as to be almost worthless. Jim Leape, international director general of WWF, hoped that today’s document would be renegotiated: “It’s pathetic. It’s appalling. If this becomes the final text the last year has been a colossal waste of time.” Friends of the Earth are even stronger in their disapproval, calling the plans “an epic failure”. But in a briefing to UK journalists Ms Spelman argued that the text was as good as any outcome agreed by 193 countries could be – and she expects it to now be rubber-stamped by the world leaders. –Tom Whipple, The Times, 20 June 2012
The head of Greenpeace International said the NGO is moving to a “war footing” after negotiators at the Rio+20 sustainable development conference watered down proposals to protect the world’s oceans. Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International’s executive director, said there were so many fudges in the draft agreement that Greenpeace now had no other option but to change its strategy and start planning waves of civil disobedience. When asked if he was prepared to die for the cause, he responded: “Yes. I feel a very deep sense of that.” –Jo Confino, The Guardian, 19 June 2012
Environmental pressure groups have written off the Rio+20 summit beginning today as “pathetic” and a “colossal failure of leadership”. Expectations were already relatively low for the summit, which is not being attended by senior world leaders. But after the negotiating text which the 130 world leaders will discuss was released the mood of environmental campaigners dropped still further. “It’s the last will and testament of a destructive 20th century development model,” said Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace’s international executive director. Jim Leape, the director-general of WWF, said “weak words” had been replaced with “toothless language”. –Alex Stevenson, Politics.co.uk, 20 June 2012
This is good news for those opposed to Agenda 21 and UN IPCC imposed global warming taxes. The ICLEI could not even get an agreement on the definition of “sustainable development.” And, they want to manage “sustainable development” on every county in the US? We need to make sure they cannot do it in Nevada County! Full Report HERE.