Check out this video of an army medic getting shot at 75 yards by a sniper. The medic’s body armor saved his life and he was able to get up and take cover. The sniper was hunted down, and the medic treated the snipers wounds.
William Kininmonth, the former head of Australia’s National Climate Centre writes:
The IPCC strives to make the point that climate variations can be explained exclusively by radiative forcing: that is, processes that affect the balance between heat absorbed from the sun and heat radiated into space. The IPCC hypothesis rests on the assumption that increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will reduce the emission of radiation to space and cause the Earth to warm.The assumption that the Earth had a stable climate and was in radiation balance before industrialisation began cannot be substantiated and is unlikely to be true. The reconstruction of past climates from geological and fossil records identifies a pattern of variability that is not consistent with the IPCC concept of stability.
The IPCC radiative forcing hypothesis ignores the atmospheric and ocean circulations that transport surplus solar energy from the tropics to polar regions. Nowhere are local temperatures due solely to radiation processes, a fact that goes to underscore the fallacy of the hypothesis.
The projections of rudimentary computer models are also flawed. There are many energy exchange processes within the climate system, including the formation of clouds and their interaction with the Earth’s radiation fields, of which there is still only limited understanding. These processes are tuned in the computer models so that the current climate statistics are reproduced much as they are observed.
An international project to compare the computer models developed by different research groups was carried out during the preparation of the IPCC’s third report. The project showed clearly that the computer models significantly underestimated the rate of transport of excess energy from the tropics to the polar regions.
…
The IPCC hypothesis of human-caused global warming, and the computer modelling tools that are used to substantiate it, are seriously flawed. Naturally occurring water vapour, not carbon dioxide, is the primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, and its pattern of concentration varies continually. In addition, the circulations of the atmosphere and the oceans and their interactions cannot be ignored in any considerations of future climate. The complex ocean circulations, the flywheel of the climate system, are only now beginning to be observed in detail.Carbon dioxide concentrations cannot be shown to have any appreciable effect on future climate, and we are not likely to alter the course of future climate by restricting carbon dioxide emissions. We need to be alert, however, to the potential for natural climate change and its inherent dangers.
…
Research into the climate system must be actively continued. The knowledge gained will be the basis for early warning of change and help identify mitigating strategies. However, there is no evidence that the course of climate change can be appreciably altered by humans, at least not by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
I thought that Morgan Spurlock was dishonest, but I didn’t realize that he was this dishonest:
A few weeks ago, I started reading Morgan Spurlock’s first book, called Don’t Eat This Book. Thinking it’d be ripe for a book review, I decided I’d put Post-It notes on the pages with passsages worthy of further examination (read: ridicule) later.A few chapters in, damned near every page was Post-It-ed.
The book is truly awful. Not just in that I don’t agree with it. It’s thinly researched (nearly all secondary sources), polemically researched (he never even speaks with or consults with a source that doesn’t already agree with him), and out and out wrongly researched. He publishes urban legends as fact, long-debunked forwarded emails as truth, and in more than a few spots cites sources that say the exact opposite of what he claims they say. He seems to have latched on to the first Google hit he found that confirms his worst suspicions about Big Food, business, commerce, and capitalism. He even abuses sources that agree with him.
Because Spurlock is so bad, Radley Balko started Morgan Spurlock Watch.
What other explanation is there for Spurlock’s lack of research other than he is just in it for the money? He does little, if any, research so he can get one product out the door and move on to something else. It’s ironic that his motivations are so nakedly commercial.
The Tour de France is one of my favorite sporting events and it starts tomorrow. Here are some links to good site to follow the action:
The Official Tour de France website
