Myth Blaster: The Case of the Dam Government Bureaucracy

Problems of Big Government is demonstrated by an email concerning the (alleged) Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Quality and an American citizen of the state of Pennsylvania (alleged), sent in by Diane S., Wisconsin. First the alleged state’s letter …

Subject: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20; Lycoming Country
Dear Mr. DeVries:
It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity:
Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring Pond. A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A review of the Department’s files shows that no permits have been issued. Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Pennsylvania Compiled Laws, annotated.
The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently hazardous and cannot be permitted. The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all activities at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the stream channel. All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 2006.
Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure to comply with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the site may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action.
We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
David L. Price
District Representative and Water Management Division


Mr. DeVries responded in the following manner, pay attention to the artfully crafted wording and the attention-getting satire (as the title to this Myth Blaster investigation) …

Dear Mr. Price,
Your certified letter dated
12/17/02 has been handed to me to respond to. I am the legal landowner but not the Contractor at 2088 Dagget Lane, Trout Run, Pennsylvania.

SpringPondDam_01 A couple of beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood ‘debris’ dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond. While I did not pay for, authorize, nor supervise their dam project, I think they would be highly offended that you call their skillful use of natures building materials ‘debris’.
I would like to challenge your department to attempt to emulate their dam project any time and/or any place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic.
These are the beavers/contractors you are seeking. As to your request, I do not think the beavers are aware that they must first fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity.
My first dam question to you is:
(1) Are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers, or
(2) do you require all beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam request?

SpringPondDam_contractor_01 If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, through the Freedom of Information Act, I request completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits that have been issued. …
I have several concerns. My first concern is, aren’t the beavers entitled to legal representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said representation – so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer. The Department’s dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event, causing flooding, is proof that this is a natural occurrence, which the Department is required to protect. In other words, we should leave the Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling them dam names.

SpringPondDam_contractor_02I f you want the stream ‘restored’ to a dam free-flow condition please contact the beavers – but if you are going to arrest them, they obviously did not pay attention to your dam letter, they being unable to read English.
In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their unauthorized dames as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green and water flows downstream. They have more dam rights than I do to live and enjoy Spring Pond. If the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection lives up to its name, it should protect the natural resources (Beavers) and the environment (Beavers’ Dams).
So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more elevated enforcement action right now. Why wait until
1/31/2006? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then and there will be no way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them.
In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention to a real environmental quality, health, problem in the area. It is the bears! Bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the beavers alone. If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! The bears are not careful where they dump!
Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office.
Thank You,
Ryan DeVries and the Dam Beavers

MYTH BLASTER VERDICT: TRUE – 
but altered from original, as well as other added printed material.

Story is true, but someone changed the location of where it occurred from the original true circumstance, as well as left out the original person who actually owned the property or at least in his name. According to Snopes (who did a fine job of investigation) …

The state of Michigan threatened local beavers with a $10,000 per day fine for failing to remove their dam.

The date of the letter was not 2006, but 1997 and it was the Grand Rapids District Office who sent the letter to a Mr. Ryan DeVries of Montcalm County. However, the legal owner was not Mr. DeVries, but Stephen L. Tvedten, and the author of the original letter . See the Truth or Fiction file original version.

In July 1997, one of Stephen Tvedten’s neighbors noticed flooding on his property and traced it back to a dam on Tvedten’s stream. He complained to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) on July 28.
Five months later, the agency responded with a letter to the offending land owner. The letter, from David Price, … was blunt. …
Mr. Tvedten responded to the
Michigan DEQ’s demand with the now widely-circulated “dam letter,” in which he pointed out that the “debris dams” he had been ordered to remove because they were constructed without permission from the state of Michigan were actually built by beavers. The DEQ later claimed they were fully aware the “debris dams” were beaver dams; the issue, they said, was that the beavers who built them had long since abandoned the dams, but Mr. Tvedten had been continuing to maintain and even build up the dams himself …
For his part, Mr. Tvedten claimed that the dams had been “abandoned” because a neighbor had killed the beavers (then filed a complaint with the state because he was concerned that the untended dams would break apart and enter his property) and that no one but the beavers had ever maintained them. …
Ken Silfven, public information officer at the State Department of Environmental Quality, said that … the account was correct. He hastened to note, however, that the case was prompted by a complaint from a neighbor who was concerned about flooding caused by the dams.[i] The department dropped its investigation after an inspection by a DEQ employee. “It probably would have been a good idea to do the inspection before we sent the notice,” Silfven said.”
After some wrangling the agency ultimately dropped the issue, but not before Stephen Tvedten found an inventive way of quickly pointing out both how ludicrous and humorous the situation was. …

Of course, people since then have received email with different state departments names attached, but the story originated in Michigan, who apparently has problems with morons working in state government offices, like too many of the other states, and probably governors like Jim Doyle, Wisconsin who believes in the Utopian Big Government – which in turn results in over-taxation, corruption, and stupidity as we have read here. Permits were once designed to ensure safe building practices – now, in every state of the union; it is a means to collect extra revenue as has been proven by Gov. Doyle’s recent largest tax hike in the history of the state of Wisconsin where all licenses and fees have been raised 40% on the average. That is quite a hike. This story represents another aspect of Big Government and the continued encroachment concerning property rights that Americans are losing day-by-day because we fail to be meticulous as to who runs our state and federal government elected offices.
The Snopes entry was last updated on April 9th 2007.
Sources:
The Strange Tail of the Outlawed Michigan Beaver Dam by David Mastio, The Detroit News, April 5th 1998, p.B5.
State Gives Beavers Cease-and-Desist Order, Associated Press, March 31st 1998.
The Spring Pond Beavers, The Wall Street Journal, March 3rd 1998.
Article, Future Lawyers blog site.
Reality-Based Humour: The DamDaily Kos
The Dam, A True Story Pros and Cons

[i] And it took the intrusive, Big Government five months to respond!

Myth Blaster: Truth About ANWR (Revisited)

This article concerns an old argument, yet an old argument that requires solving, especially in the aftermath of the ClimateGate revelations and other ‘gates’ opened up in the post-ClimateGate period between last November and now.
The subject is from an email that has been circulating for some time to demonstrate how special interest groups in the name of the health of global environment has not only stuck their noses in a matter that seems to be beyond their ability to grasp, but alter or make up the facts that substantiates their venomous advocacy against America becoming self-sufficient when it comes to crude oil production. Rather than transcribing the email here, I will just direct you to a site that has already published it, including the photos in the circulated email.
It is at Heritage blog publishing dated June 29th 2008, as well as at Canada Free Press. Pretty pathetic that nothing was done about this since 2006, it is 2010 and still they listen to the environmentalists who should undergo psychoanalysis in order to possibly understand their reasoning.
So based upon the subject and the email of the Comparison of ANWR and environmentalist and government advocacy individuals and groups against drilling in Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, other sites where at least 34 billion barrels of oil just sits waiting to be tapped; as well as off shore drilling prospects that China has taken advantage of off the coast of Cuba – here is the analysis and assessment of the email …

Myth Blaster Verdict:
TRUE – with exception concerning local residents’ statement.
The ANWR is an acronym for Arctic National Wildlife Refuge located in Alaska.
It is an area that consists of 18,286,482 acres in the region of Alaska known as the North Slope. The site of the proposed oil drilling location is in a geographical area called the Coastal Plain in the northwestern tip of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The history of the region can be found at Wikipedia.
Snopes disagrees on the issue and the only source they provide is from The Wilderness Society concerning oil spill issues – with the link going to the home page.
The couple publishing Snopes has been known to be bias on certain subject material. More Americans agree with the folks fighting Congress, the EPA and government agencies siding with self-indulgent environmental organizations and independent radicals – but Congress is only listening to the junk scientists and environmental wackos these days. 
Pictures shown by those opposing Americans becoming self-sufficient and less dependent upon foreign oil are pictures of the ANWR, but in areas that are not in the vicinity of the proposed oil drilling site. 
A clear demonstration of the leftist misinformation brainwashing. Here is a picture that environmentalist depicted of the portion of ANWR that is not involved with any oil drilling:
The portion where proposed drilling in ANWR is coastal tundra – here is a reality photo:
Helicopter in photo above is area where proposed drilling it to take place. 
And the notion that wildlife is in danger if ANWR is drilled at proposed site? 
They say a picture is worth a thousand words [Prudhoe Bay drill site]:
If oil drilling was a problem, Alaskans would not want it – there are already drill sites at Prudhoe Bay Oil Field (17% of domestic crude oil production), Sourdough Oil Field, Kuparuk Oil Field and Kaktovik sites. The caribou herds don’t seem to mind. Alaskans know what is good for Alaska and the central, federal government has no constitutional right to interfere with state business; unless it is against the articles in the Constitution of the United States that directs our government in what powers they have and don’t have.
The Democrats, President Obama and Marxist-Progressives in Congress say they want to create jobs, yet they continually say NO to prospects that will create them, or make job creation in private sector more difficult with their oppressive and often unconstitutional legislation; as well as those among them who must have their noses in everyone else’s business.
It is true that 75% of the Alaskan voters had opted for oil drilling. It is unclear about the statement concerning the statement local residents because the area is tundra and a national state park. Maybe they are referring to the herds of caribou that cross the area from time to time.
Oil drilling today leaves a small footprint in visibility of the environment. 
The Alaska oil tanker disaster was caused by a First Mate who was intoxicated on his watch – caused by human error – not the standards and practices of an oil corporation, Exxon in this case. Remember this: Oil companies detest oil spills: (a) it is wasteful of their product; (b) the cost in fines and clean up is horrendous on the profit margin; and (c) bad publicity.
For the seventh time a bill has come up in the House of Representatives of the US Congress to drill at ANWR, as well as proposed bills to drill offshore in US territory. As a side note, offshore rigs withstood Hurricane Katrina, while refineries in Louisiana were damaged. By not drilling ripe spots for crude oil, it will eventually bubble to the surface in various amounts, causing – yes, you guessed it – pollution! Ever hear of the Tar Pits in California?
Environmental issues are always important to any nation. I personally would like the scenery of nature to always be around, as clean an air as naturally possible, and water an important resource to be kept clean for obvious reasons. More vegetation equals cleaner air, because combined with the rain process it is a natural cleaning component as well as producing oxygen for all living things on Earth.
However, I am for protecting the environment by using common sense. We have found that climate alarms, environmental alarms, and so on are politically motivated and pioneered for people that seem to be not all there – and basically have no common sense.
America’s dependence upon foreign oil has invited several problems to occur, and here is a few:
By purchasing the majority of America’s crude oil from the Arabs, the United States is financing the very enemy we are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Part of the major problem with the economic crisis has to do with inflation or holding back on crude oil purchases from foreign nations.
It concerns a national security issue in that dependence upon foreign oil provides certain nations to use crude oil as a tool in their endeavors to see America buckle or use it as a method of blackmail.
Alaskans should have a say about economical development in their state – not the US Congress. It’s something called state rights in the articles of the Constitution of the United States.
I rest my case. Some people just can’t handle the truth.
Write to your representatives and senators and tell them it is time to favor America’s well being, rather than their political games.
[Special thanks to Joan Bartelson]
Further Reading and Bibliography:
History of ANWR … Wikipedia
Arctic National Wildlife RefugeUS government link
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge – Defenders of Wildlife … Save Arctic Refuge website
Study: ANWR Oil Would Have Little Impact … MSNBC (believe it or not)
Truth about ANWR Drilling … The Foundry, Heritage Foundation
The Truth about ANWR … Just Average American
The Truth About ANWR … Glenn Beck Video
The Truth About ANWR DrillingCanada Free Press
The Truth about ANWR … Atlas Shrugs

Global Warming Hoax Alarmists: Running Out of Steam

Warmists in Frantic Effort to Save Their Failing Theory by Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, ICECAP

The global warmers are becoming increasingly desperate to prop up their failing prophesy in every way possible. Behaving just as Leon Festinger predicted in When Prophecies Fail. As the earth shows no net warming in a decade and cooling into its 7th year, as new models suggest cooling may continue because of natural ocean cycles, as the sun stays quiet now 12 years since the last solar minimum, usually a signal of cooling, as more and more peer review calls into question the importance of CO2 and of the the accuracy of the models and the entire greenhouse theory because of the failure of fingerprinting, the alarmists begin a frantic effort to save their failing theory. You see so many have won the lottery and want to ensure the annuity checks keep coming.

As we indicated in an earlier blog, they are now busy reinventing old data. The Hadley Center has repeatedly refused to release lists of the stations used in compiling their global data sets or in their papers claiming the data shows no urban adjustment is needed. NASA and NOAA continually revises old data and makes gross assumptions that always result in more warming. The old reliable radiosonde weather balloon data gets challenged because it (and the satellite derived data) do not show the warming the models and theory predict for the high tropical atmosphere. A legitimate scientist would trust the data and assume the models are in error (as models so often are) but to these agenda driven alarmists, the models must be right and the data wrong. But because they can’t challenge the satellite data which has been quality assured and passed the sniff test, they go after the weather balloon data. They use some of the same unsound tricks that get more warming in the global data and revise the old balloon data to get better agreement with the models. See the ludicrous adjusted data (RAOB 1.4 in black) in the diagram below.

They don’t stop there. They try a left end run by using winds as a proxy for temperatures to show the warming not shown by the balloon temperature measurements was really there (see May 26 Warm Winds Comfort Climate Models). In the same Natural Geoscience Journal issue, coincidentally, Peter Thorne of Britain Met Office Hadley Centre in a commentary wrote “The new study “provides … long-awaited experimental verification of model predictions.” All these efforts were “fast-tracked” through the Journal of Climate and Nature in record time to show the complicity of the AMS and Nature in the whole scam.
Then there is that mid-century cold period, well-documented in many cold and snow records that were set in the 1960s into the 1970s but a thorn in the side of the alarmists as when combined with the apparent current cooling might imply cyclical behavior which would be hard to explain away without considering natural factors. So the solution – again find fault with the data. NASA and NOAA make adjustments to their “adjustments” to minimize the cooling then and now. Now they suddenly discover in a paper in the latest Nature that the ocean temperature measurement techniques did not change at once but gradually (something well known for years) and making that slower correction for the ocean changes results in at least part of the mid-century cold period become an artifact. This now will allow models to tweak back on the aerosol “fudge factor” adjustment they had to use to explain the cooling (since they downplay the sun and don’t handle ocean cycles well). Diminishing the cyclical look will allow them to argue this current cooling is a brief anomaly not totally inconsistent with their models, at least for a while longer. Unfortunately it may be a long enough period to allow congress and the new President to do something stupid. No on further reflection, that would be nothing unusual, I should have said REALLY stupid.

Myth Blaster: ‘Once More Into the Breach’ – The Global Warming Hoax

This morning, December 13th, the following was released by AP

warming The U.N. climate chief warned Thursday that a deadlock between the United States and the European Union over emissions cuts threatened to derail talks aimed at launching negotiations for a new global warming pact.
”If we don’t get wording on the future, then the whole house of cards falls to pieces,” said Yvo de Boer, as a two-week U.N. climate conference entered the final stretch.
Washington has refused to accept language in a draft document that would allow negotiations for a successor to the Kyoto Protocol to consider asking industrialized nations to cut emissions by 25 percent to 40 percent by 2020. The EU favors inclusion of specific targets in the document.


To negotiate for cleaner air is a good thing, but articles in the Kyoto Protocol treaty are about global warming alarmist policy. The present treaty has not been adhered to by certain nations that signed it. So it is another UN endeavor that costs certain participants while others don’t pay their share, and with the past record of scandals, it is wise for the US or any other nation to balk at a policy based upon junk science. If nations are serious about cleaning up air and water pollution than that is what they should address – not some consensus that later, after trillions of dollars are wasted find out that it was all hype.
Problem is that logical voices are being snuffed out as the media and science groups join the alarmist clamor for something that is a natural occurrence in Earth’s history. Nations are on the road to putting themselves in economic stress over something that if was occurring as fast a rate as they claim – there would no way to stop it and the only thing we could do is prepare for it. Ice and snow in the pole regions of Earth have receded on several occasions, but no one is mentioning that once the Antarctica was green land, as well as the place we now know as “Greenland”. Once dinosaurs roamed through vast green grasslands, forests and jungles, in a world where the Earth was truly globally warmed. But it changed, and those that didn’t change with it, died.
By all means – we should endeavor to clean up pollutants around our planet and ensure that large forests exist everywhere to perform the remarkable process of using carbon dioxide to generate oxygen. Plant life, like water, is important to life on Earth and we should treat it like the treasure it is. But we have to stop listening to those whose interests are other than what they claim. We have to meet challenges with logic and purpose that benefits all in whatever actions a body of governments or a single government undertakes.
One question may be asked: Is this gradual change just a swing or is it “permanent” – lasting for a long period of geological time?
Records show that the average Earth temperatures, specifically in certain locations, were warmer than they have been in the last decade. So what’s with that? Let’s approach this with reasoning and real scientific endeavor – not panic-stricken, politically motivated alarmist responses.
This is one of my major arguments against the global warming consensus.
What is the primary tool of socialist/communist/statist governments? Using fear of something in their propaganda is one of the ten points of Marxism. Here is a recent statement from the British foreign secretary Jack Straw, who said:

…skeptics should be treated like advocates of Islamic terror and denied access to the media.

This is another example of a tool using political tactics of Marxism – withholding information and forbidding disagreement of the “facts” disseminated by a government. In other words, keeping the truth from the public and not allowing any other idea to form or be presented. This sort of Marxist behavior exists in places where government controls the education system, so this is nothing new.
And check this quote from George Monbiot, author of The Age of Consent: A Manifesto for a New World Order, which appeared in Guardian magazine: [where did we hear the words “World Order” before? George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush  – the latter advocating amnesty for 12 million plus individuals who ignore immigration and identification laws in the United States.]

Every time someone drowns as a result of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his office and drowned.

Another rule of the ten planks of Marxism – corporations and commercial entities are operated by evil wealthy people, it is called class warfare [more like jealousy] – creating animosity between the natural economic differences amongst the people of a civilization. Should we bite the hand that feeds us? No. Should we regulate commerce and corporations to ensure that fair business practices exist and they are not polluting our planet? Yes. Should we advocate fair business practices and fair employment? Yes.
The leadership behind this and their militant followers want you to believe that our planet’s very existence is threatened because some ice is melting in traditionally cold regions and the temperature has been fluctuating (less than one degree).
And, by the way, these are the same people who rammed evolution down our throats, and now tells us that life on Earth cannot adapt to change and will be totally destroyed. Hmm. The same people who cannot predict weather accurately within a one week period. Hmm.

While intoning these demands, often in the language of fanatical true believers, what global warming militants seldom discuss is the real cost of their proposals – both in terms of dollars and in terms of human lives.
Just radically curtailing use of refrigeration would result in millions of human deaths from food spoilage and contamination. Restrictions on use of cars, airplanes and other means of transportation would wipe out much of the progress of the last 100 years. And drastically curtailing industrial activity would result in global depression, disease and death.
Like it or not, industrial society has made possible long lives and prosperity for billions of people who otherwise would have died at a young age from poverty, disease and starvation.

Mr. Wollstein goes on to discuss reasons why the global warming effects are taken place, et cetera. Go to this link and check it out.
Wollstein writes:

That means that less than 2/1000 of all CO2 is produced by human activity. So even if we wiped out every car, power plant, jet liner, and human being from the face of the earth, there would be no noticeable effect on global CO2 levels.
The most important greenhouse gas by far is water vapor, which evaporates from oceans, lakes and rivers. Water vapor accounts for up to 90% of the earth’s greenhouse effect. …
To put it another way, the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is the result of changes in solar activity, not the cause of it.
Climate change is natural, continuous, and caused by changes in solar emissions. Over hundreds of thousand of years, the earth’s average surface temperature has varied within a narrow 4-degree temperature range. That variation causes both “warm periods,” like we are now living in, and “cold periods” accompanied by ice ages, which periodically destroy most life on earth.

Ice ages are more destructive upon life than warming trends, and just a decade or two ago, “scientists” were warning everyone that doom was upon us because places like New York city would be covered in ice and snow and people would starve because of lack of food, et cetera. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.
And Mr. Wollstein basically states what I have written:

Yes, the world has real environmental problems caused by man, including pollution of the seas and destruction of rain forests. But the “global warming crisis” is largely a myth.

Global warming alarmist activists do not want you to know the truth – because they will then be seen as incorrect in their beliefs concerning climate change.

For example, while the UN’s 1995 “Global Temperature Chart” clearly demonstrates that the earth was much warmer than today during the Medieval Warm Period, more recent UN temperature charts have eliminated the Warm Period altogether.

Remember what I told you about progressives, socialists, communists and tyrannical leaders – they don’t want you to know truth, only what they choose to reveal to you. The tyrannical leadership wants you to believe that they are the only ones that can keep things in order and that you cannot be an individual and stand up and take charge of your own life. Those who insist upon the Big Government ideology put themselves above the average citizen and want the public to believe that government must control virtually every aspect of our lives.
And the information reported is not the same as the reality …

These “continuous warming” graphs contradict thoroughly-documented periods when the earth was getting cooler, including the “little Ice Age” from 1450 to 1850, and a period of record cold from 1940-1970. In fact, the 1940-1970 cooling period resulted in a frenzy in which the media claimed that human industrial activity (particularly our old friend, CO2 emissions) was about to cause by 1995 a new ice age which would threaten all life on earth. Popular magazines, like Popular Science, even featured terrifying pictures on their covers of major U.S. cities covered by ice.

But the folks at the UN are not including this information in their “talks” at their “conferences”. And you know why. Isn’t about time to defang the UN or at least withdraw our support until it either reforms or reinvents itself? Shouldn’t aggressive/tyrannical nations not be allowed to participate in UN activities? What better incentive to encourage leadership of nations to form a democracy? What better way to defang rogue nations that cause so much trouble in the world – like North Korea and Iran, for example? But I digress …
Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson wrote:

The bad news is that the climate model on which so much effort is expended are unreliable because they still use fudge-factors rather than physics to represent important things like evaporation and convection, clouds and rainfall.

What is evident here is that we must not panic over something that isn’t true …

The bottom line: Don’t worry about global warming. It is not caused by human beings or by our CO2 emissions. The amount of warming that is occurring is normal and modest, and does not threaten the earth or human life. The estimated one degree increase in the next 100 years isn’t going to melt the ice caps or put London and New York ten feet under water.

What we DO have to worry about are the leftist elites who are trying to push this on the world’s nations. One must query why? Do they really believe this bad scientific examination/research – or do they have other, underlying reasons? Remember that the EU promotes Big Government. A government that is designed to take over the lives of their citizens from cradle to grave, is a government who insists that they (those in power) can run your life better than you can. And every time we do not take care of our own personal life and insist that government “do something” – we are asking those in government to take over. Freedom and liberty is then thrown out the window. Socialism has been progressively popular in Europe, with some groups insisting that a democratic republic is better.
Reviewing Al Gore’s political record, one should have been suspicious of the global warming advocacy from the start. Instead, he has won an Academy Award for a “documentary” on the subject, sold books on the subject, and now has won, of all things, a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in the global warming scam. And now, he is preparing to become even wealthier by joining a business venture that is based upon the global warming hype. Can you see the big picture here?
And, Wollstein agrees as well …

If global warming is not man-made, not an impending disaster, and actually good for the earth, why are so many prominent people claiming the exact opposite?
The answer in two words is: money and power.
Those who promote the popular global warming disaster myth are rewarded with promotions, large grants, big book and video sales (like Al Gore’s bestselling An Inconvenient Truth video), and more political power. The ideology of “impending global warming disaster” is indeed a very convenient lie for would-be power-seekers. Literally billions of dollars (particularly from government) are pouring into the coffers of environmental groups which repeat the “global warming disaster” party line. All of this money has resulted n the public being constantly bombarded by ever-more shrill forecasts of global warming doom and gloom. And it’s getting worse. Schools are now indoctrinating children as young as five about the impending “global warming disaster.” Posters in schools warn, “Your mommy and daddy are destroying the planet.”
”Global warming” has become the new, politically-correct truth, and those who question it are increasingly denied access to the media, refused jobs, or are stigmatized as evil “destroyers of the earth.”
In fact, the claimed “scientific consensus on global warming,” is largely a fraud. …
Skeptics include some of the world’s foremost scientists: 85 climate experts who signed the 1995
Leipzig Declaration … 4,000 scientists from around the world (including 70 Nobel laureates) who signed the Heidelberg Appeal … and the 17,000 American scientists who signed the Oregon Petition denying that human activity was the cause of global warming.
You can see a complete list at www.sepp.org or www.globalwarminghysteria.com.
In any event, scientific fact is not established by opinion polls, but by science.

Scientist Peter Doran confirmed in 2002 that the Antarctic has been cooling while climate models all predict a strong warming.

Wollstein:

The world’s best meteorologists using the most advanced computers cannot predict local weather two weeks in the future. So how can global warming proponents predict the entire world’s climate 50 or 100 years in the future? The answer is they can’t. …

There are those who want to return to the horse and buggy days, forgetting that urban areas would be polluted with another disease-carrying pollutant: horse manure (even with the use of manure catching bags for horses drawing carriages, carts, and wagons) – Catherine Bennett of The Guardian in the United Kingdom writes:

In short, if we can rise to the challenge, the permanent abolition of the wheel would have the marvelously synergistic effect of creating thousands of new jobs – as blacksmiths, farriers, grooms, and so on – at the same time as it conserved energy and saved the planet from otherwise inevitable devastation.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and thus clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

Global warming hysteria matches that statement.
And, isn’t it utterly convenient for the proponents of global warming hysteria that they do not invite or forbid any scientists who disagree from attending meetings and conferences? Are you not suspicious yet?
A presidential election is coming up. Please include in your issue considerations (and insist that candidates discuss it) the matter concerning global warming. This president, one of the few things he has done that I agree with, has been persistent in combating the doom and gloom advocates to prevent further waste of taxpayer funding on events and entities such as the Kyoto Protocol treaty.
photosynthesis-color-chart A final question to you: Remember photosynthesis in high school science? Plants use CO2 (carbon dioxide), sun and water and in return produce oxygen and other byproducts. I rest my case. Global warming, as the alarmists present it – is a MYTH. Don’t fall for it, and don’t elect any public official who promotes the consensus.
If you want to be alarmed about something be alarmed about the following:

Grist magazine has called for Nuremberg-style “war crime” trials for those who deny that human beings are causing a global climate disaster.

SOURCES:
The Pope Condemns the Climate Change Prophets of Doom by Simon Caldwell, December 12th 2007
Dishonest Political Tampering with the Science on Global Warming
by Christopher Monckton, Denpassar, Bali, December 7th 2007
U.N. Blackballs International Scientists from Climate Change Conference by Tom Swiss, December 4th 2007
John Stossel Takes on Al Gore a YouTube video that runs a little over 8 minutes.
The Science Isn’t Settled by Timothy Ball, Climatology Professor, University of Winnipeg (3.5mb) – must have MS PowerPoint software
PowerPoint Presentation by Joseph D’Aleo, Certified Consultant Meteorologist and Executive Director of ICECAP (9.2mb) – must have MS PowerPoint software
PowerPoint Presentation by Roy Spencer, Research Scientist at Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama at Huntsville (1.1mb) – must have MS PowerPoint software or view as HTML

The Real Science, Heartland Institute
Natural Climate Cycles – PDF, Heartland Institute
Video, The Great Global Warming Swindle
Plot Temperature Trends for a City Near You, CO2 Science website
Twenty-Three (and Growing) Smoking Guns of Global Warming by Heartland Institute
Satellite Temperature Data, Wikipedia Economics of Global Warming, Heartland Institute
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism by Christopher C. Horner
Green Energy News, February 1st 2004, Vol. 8 No. 45, Plants Do It

Look To The Skies! – Website of astronomer/meteorologist Steven L. J. Russo, Planetarium Manager [Particular not Space Weather section concerning solar activity]
Green Counter-Establishment: How It Holds Power by Bonner Cohen (PDF)
Global Warming Hoax

Global Warming – Doomsday Called OffYouTube video
Cold, Hard Facts, New York Times, July 26th 2006 by Peter Doran