NC Media Watch

Global Warming Special on Fox News Tonight (updated 08-28-10)

From Fox News:

Sean Hannity will have a special report:

Controlling your carbon footprint has become a global fad, but is it all just a con job? And how much green is it costing you? Sean investigates the truth behind the billion dollar industry!

9PM Eastern, 6PM Pacific, repeated 3 hours later on the same channel.

Channel 360 on DirecTV, 205 on Dish Network, check your local cable and satellite listings.

Update #1: Here is a link to the video if you missed it: http://vodpod.com/watch/4325030-the-green-swindle-video-foxnews-com

California is on the cusp of the next Grand Minimum

Russ Steele

David Archibald has a guest post at Watts Up With That. He uses the latest data to predicts a Dalton Minimum redo.

F10.7 flux at solar maximum will be 105, equating to a sunspot number of 50. It will be the weakest solar cycle since Solar Cycle 6, the second half of the Dalton Minimum (1810 to 1823). Solar Cycle 5 had a maximum amplitude of 49.2 and Solar Cycle 6 of 48.7.
The evidence for a Dalton Minimum repeat continues to build. As a 210 year de Vries cycle event, it has come along right on schedule.

It is time to start thinking about the consequences of a long term cooling period. In the early 1800s California's coastal weather was cool and dry during the Dalton Minimum (1790 to 1830).

By examining the California Mission documents, and tree ring records from the period, 1795 to 1825, we know that California experienced drought conditions from 1794 - 1795, 1805 - 1813 and 1821 - 1825. There was a strong El Niño in 1815 - 1816 producing very wet conditions.  The climate was cool enough to stunt the Native American crops, according to Mission Records. The growing season was shorter and some grains would not mature. With the help of Mission Fathers Indian the farmers shifted from wheat to oats that matured earlier.  They also started to migrate from native structures into the warmer adobe buildings built by the Spanish, according to records and historical evidence.

The La Nina induced cooling has already influenced agriculture production in California.  A cool PDO and a Dalton like Minimum could have a significant negative impact on California agriculture, especially those crops that like long hot summers. 

Over e-mail Transom: Extreme Weather and Climate Change

Russ Steele

I got this email from RePower America an Al Gore organization promoting the dangers of human caused global warming.

Extreme weather is putting hundreds of thousands of lives and livelihoods at risk all around the world. In order to avoid the worst and most devastating impacts of the severe weather events that are consistent with climate change, we must begin to significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

This is the kind of crap that is being sent the faithful to raise money for their cause. Let's examine some of the claims in: Extreme Weather and Global Climate Change

Pollution from human activities is warming our climate. The 10 warmest years on record all occurred since 1990, and the last decade was the hottest recorded since worldwide record keeping began more than 100 years ago. The period between January and June of 2010 was the warmest six months on record.

Let check the facts on this point:

Spot checks of the data shows that the world is not warming, the data is being rigged to show warming. Grid squares without weather stations in Russian Siberia, Africa, Greenland and Canada shows warming where there are no weather station. The details can be found here.

Al Gore's minions continue:

A warming climate increases the chance that we will experience extreme weather events such as floods, droughts and intense storms, and ramps up the risk that severe weather events will cause catastrophic damage.The floods, fires and droughts we're seeing in places like Pakistan and Russia are consistent with the effects of global warming, including temperature increases, increased precipitation in some parts of the world, and droughts in others.

Lets check the facts on this point, NOAA Says It’s Not Due to Global Warming:

The US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Earth System Research Laboratory published a report on Aug 13 [http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/csi/moscow2010/] which states that despite “strong evidence for a warming planet, greenhouse gas forcing fails to explain the 2010 heat wave over western Russia. … the current blocking event is intrinsic to the natural variability of summer climate in this region, a region which has a climatological vulnerability to blocking and associated heat waves (e.g., 1960, 1972, 1988). … Our assessment indicates that, owing to the mainly natural cause for this heat wave, it is very unlikely that a similar event will recur next summer or in the immediate future (next decade).”  More details here.

And still more claims:

In early August, a 97-square mile chunk of ice--the largest since 1962--broke away from the northwest coast of Greenland.1 Canadian officials fear the massive "ice island" could pose a risk to ships and oil platforms.2Unless we significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, we are likely to see even more extreme weather events and the consequences they bring

Lets check this facts on this point: 

And ocean science professor Andreas Muenchow says years of data on the glacier itself show that after this month's event, the mass of ice is still, on average, discharging about the same amount of water it usually does - some 600 million cubic meters a year, or about 220,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools. "Even a big piece like this over 50 years is not that significant.  It's just the normal rate," he said.

Muenchow warns people not to jump to conclusions. "An event like this, this specific event, all flags go immediately up, 'Oh, let's explain this by global warming.' I cannot support that," he said. More details here.

What did we learn from this analysis? We found out that Al Gore and his minions are trying to scare people in to donating, so they can keep publishing global warming propaganda.

What do you know about global warming?

Russ Steele

Plant Fossils of West Virginia has posted a global warming knowledge test. It comes with a warning:

"Caution: This section contains sound science, not media hype, and may therefore contain material not suitable for young people trying to get a good grade in political correctness."

Now test you knowledge, so you can access how much politically correct global warming media hype has crept into your cranium: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

H/T to a regular reader for this tip.

If you do not look, you cannot see it

Russ Steele

We once had a Rottweiler dog who would ignore anything bigger than he was. It could not be a threat to him if he pretended it did not exist.  Now we have some of our political leaders are acting like my dog, if they ignore the AB32 problem it does not exist. These local leaders claim the AB32 is of no concern to Nevada County.  One is reported to claim he does not have any information that companies are actually leaving California. No really, that is true?

Here is a web site that tracks the job losses in California. 

California's economic climate is suffering. California's continuing job loss, the impact that high taxes and crushing regulations are crippling our state's economy. The businesses highlighted below are examples of companies that have already decided to escape California’s anti-business climate. As a result, the jobs that California families depended upon are subsequently headed to other states or other countries.

Here is an example for the Week of August 16, 2010

A Weekly Compilation of California's Job Losses leading to Red Ink

Business departures are motivated by high taxes, undue regulations, excessive fines and fees, and high workers’ compensation costs, a legal environment stacked up against businesses, and lengthy construction permitting requirements.

Boeing ships jobs from Irvine to Arizona (Lost Jobs: 160)

Boeing's confirmation of the Irvine closure comes just three days after Boeing announced that it was moving its C-130 Avionics Modernization Program and B-1 program operations in Long Beach to Oklahoma City eliminating 800 local jobs. "California’s ability to nurture aerospace technology development and production programs has been a source of pride and prosperity for the state and the nation for more than half a century; strong political action is needed to prevent irreversible erosion of this important economic engine,” stated Abe Karem.

Adobe's pulls up stakes in CA for Utah (Jobs Lost: 1000)

Software giant Adobe Systems Inc. plans to significantly expand its presence in Utah by investing $100 million to build a new facility and hire as many as 1,000 people. The announcement came Thursday, immediately after Utah offered the California-based Fortune 500 company a $40.2 million incentive to expand in the state. Industry and state officials say the decisions by companies like Adobe to invest in Utah give even more weight to the critical mass of high-tech companies whose presence helps the state attract a skilled work force.

Glick's Old Fashion Meat Market forced to close (Job Lost: 50)

Glick’s has been a fixture in Visalia since 1961, where it has become the regular stop for old time locals and their children. Its closure comes on the edge of a state that makes it difficult for any small business to keep its head above water. Coupled with the economic downtown, California’s regular business expenses, and high taxes, Glick’s was forced to close their doors on July 31 st. "I hope [the economy] gets better, California is a hard place to do business,” said proprietor and butcher Shelly Byrd

California call center closes (Jobs Lost: 325)

In order to save operating costs the Hilton call center located in Hemet California will be forced to close. The call center closure is another example of the economic impact and tax incentives offered outside of California. The facility has been located at 3570 W. Florida Ave. for the last 11 years and is an important employer of many Hemet citizens. In late 2000, the center more than doubled in size from its original 200 employees. It's definitely unfortunate that this significant number of jobs will be lost in the community," Hemet City Manager Brian Nakamura said.

Exit Question: That data is available is available here if our local leaders what to find it, but they seem to be clueless. Why?

Click here for a Week by Week Listing of lost jobs in California. Do not be like our local leaders pretending California job losses are insignificant to Nevada County.

Sierra Business Council gearing up to oppose Prop 23 (edited)

Russ Steele

The Sierra Business Council is now endorsing a web site put up by the rent seeking organizations that have benefited from California environmental law and were poised to benefit even more with the full implementation of AB32.

The SBC has promoting the propaganda that is spewing from www.StopDirtyEnergyProp.com starting with this statement:

“Two Texas oil companies are taking control of California’s ballot to repeal the state’s leading clean energy and clean air laws."

This is an emotional appeal with no factual relevance.  AB32 was written to control green house gases, mainly CO2 it was not intended to repeal any of the others clean air regulation currently on the books in California.  Those clean air and energy laws that are on books now would stay on the books. The only impact of Prop 23 is to suspend AB32 implementation of:

• The proposed cap-and-trade program currently under development by ARB.
• The low carbon fuel standard already adopted by ARB.
• The already-adopted ARB regulation that enables the state to collect fees from high GHG emitters.
• The 33 percent renewable electricity standard currently under development by ARB and the California Energy Commission (CEC).
• The landfill methane control measure regulation already adopted by ARB.
• The heavy-duty GHG emission reduction measure (aerodynamic efficiency)already adopted by ARB.
• The green building standards already adopted by the Building Standards Commission.
• The mandatory commercial recycling requirements currently under development by ARB.

Prop 23 will not impact laws already being implemented under other legislation passed by the Legislature:

• Land use policies to promote reductions in vehicle miles traveled enacted by SB 375.
• Emission standards on new vehicles, enacted by AB 1493.
• Energy efficiency standards on buildings and appliances.
• Diesel retrofit regulations adopted as part of ARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan.
• Nor is it to block federal provisions for controlling greenhouse gases.

Who is behind the Dirty Energy Web Site theme being promoted by SBC?  It was the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights which was started by Van Jones the avowed Communist who was Obama’s Green Jobs Czar.

Van Jones is the founder of both the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and Green For All. He is the author of the New York Times Bestseller The Green Collar Economy: How One Solution Can Solve Our Two Biggest Problems (Harper One 2008), which is endorsed by Nancy Pelosi, Tom Daschle and Al Gore. Most recently, Van served as the Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation for the White House Council on Environmental Quality until September 2009.

Jones was fired by President Obama when Glenn Beck showed videos of Van Jones declaring he was a communist and was willing to destroy capitalism by using the power of environmental laws.  Since the SBC is promoting the dirty oil theme created by an organization lead by an avowed Communist, can we assume that they support Van Jones philosophy for destroying capitalism?  Or, have the just made a mistake in their zeal to promote more government funded green job grants for their organization under AB32.  I think they just made a mistake.

The SBC and Frisch are not impartial to Prop23 and AB32 issues. AB32 promoted legislation is their bread and butter. They are just singing for their supper in this latest propaganda blitz.

Steven Frisch writes:

Sierra Business Council is opposing Proposition 23 because it moves all of us backwards and detracts from the vision of a more sustainable future and a more sustainable regional economy. Please click here to learn more about the economic rationale that we believe supports No on Prop. 23.

You can help protect California’s clean energy standards. Please take a few seconds to join the campaign alongside Sierra Business Council against Prop. 23.

Exit Question: Is campaigning the proper for role of a government funded non-profit agency?

Bonus Question: (Removed)

Editor's Note: I have edited the above to improve the accuracy of my remarks. The first "Dirty Energy"' site was developed by the Ella Baker Center and was on their web site. Subsequently, others have adopted the theme on a different web site. Now I cannot find a direct link between the two sites other than similar wording. They used to share an IP address, now they are different. Perhaps a stretch too far?

Scientific ignorance can be dangerous

Russ Steele

Steve Frisch writing in the comments at Jeff P’s blog.

First, many greenhouse gases besides CO2 effect asthma, as the studies posted clearly show. It is not just black carbon. There is a clear link with ozone. Ozone is one of the most prevalent pollutants in our local environment.

Second, the gases that cause global warming are the gases that either cause or exacerbate asthma, thus reducing one reduces the other.

Mr. Frisch has decided he cannot debate his KVMR Commentary here, the crowd is too rough, or maybe it is the pointed questions that are too hard to answer.  Let’s start with this statement:

Ozone is one of the most prevalent pollutants in our local environment.

Really, the only time it is a problem is in the summer time and the ozone blows in from the bay area and the valley.  The other problem is that the CARB modeling of ozone levels is flawed, they have been unable to replicate the real world. See his post at Rebane Ruminations Ozone-Politics, and the link at the bottom of the post to a more detailed study of the issue in the SESF Data Bank.

Now let’s look at this statement:

Second, the gases that cause global warming are the gases that either cause or exacerbate asthma, thus reducing one reduces the other.

The Sierra Business Council has been a major promoter of weather-tight houses to save energy. The EPA admits that these weather-tight homes are to blame for rising asthma incidents among children.  Weather-tight homes result have increased in indoor air-related health problems as people inhale higher levels of airborne pollutants.

Even EPA concludes that "the air within homes and other buildings can be more seriously polluted than the outdoor air in even the largest and most industrialized cities," and that "for many people, the risks to health may be greater due to exposure to air pollution indoors than outdoors."2 As far back as 1988, the agency recognized that "the current trend toward sealing off homes to conserve energy may have serious health consequences."3

While the reason or reasons for the asthma increase are still not known, many researchers believe that the deterioration of indoor air quality is a contributor. A New England Journal of Medicine editorial suggested "decreased ventilation after the energy crisis in the United States in the 1970s as a cause of increased exposure to the indoor contaminants known to trigger and exacerbate asthma attacks."4

More details here.  Now, is it CO2 that is causing more asthma,  or is it the weather-tight homes being promoted by the SBC. According to the EPA it is the weather-tight houses. 

Exit Question: Will reducing CO2 reduce asthma?  How?  Frisch provides no credible evidence! 

Could this be a Tea Party Theme Song

Russ Steele

After writing this song and sending out on an e-mail list
a Tennessee middle school football coach was termination for alleged political incorrectness.  I think he has a bigger career as song writer.

Yes, but at what cost?

Russ Steele

Even before George Rebane uttered his first phrase in support of Prop 23 on KVMR  the left was demanding equal time. A copy of George’s Commentary is here.

How the other side, Steven Frisch the Sierra Business Council President has produced a commentary against Prop 23.  You will find a copy here, along with an ego boosting introduction.

The Sierra Business Council is a non-profit that could not exist with out government and foundation grants. They will benefit from continuing grants under AB32.  On the other hand George Rebane has no direct economic interest in the suspension of AB32, other than seeking ways to reduce the growing cost of environmentalism in Nevada County and the State.

Now let us take a look at Mr Frisch presentation, remembering he has horse in this race.  He opens with this statement:

“Four years ago California passed a clean air law that holds polluters accountable and requires them to reduce air pollution that threaten  human health and contributes to climate change”

AB32 is not a clean air law, it is a law to reduce the production of greenhouse gases, mostly CO2.  CO2 is a trace gas essential to life on earth, and there is growing evidence that the 4% of human generated CO2 is not responsible for any significant global warming.  It is highly deceptive to label the gas you exhale as a pollutant, it is not. 

Frisch continues:

“Today two Texas oil companies are spending millions to push Proposition 232, a deceptive measure that would gut California clean technology and energy investments, kill jobs, create more air pollution, and increase or dependence on foreign oil.”

While it is true that Texas oil companies are spending millions, another major contributors include the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and citizen like me. I have donated to save California Jobs. The Yes on 23 campaign is supported by a Coalition of Taxpayers, Employers, Food Producers, Energy, Transportation and Forestry Companies, not just the “evil” oil companies.  A complete list of supporters is here. 

James Cameron - King of the Hypocrites

Russ Steele

There were two things that I found unsettling in James Cameron’s movie Avatar. First was the Korean War era military equipments that was not consistent with the future setting of the film. The other was the overt environmentalist messages.  Now we find out that Cameron was not willing to stand behind his message.  Ann McElhinney writes at Climate Realists:

Friends,

Last March James Cameron sounded defiant.

The Avatar director was determined to expose journalists, such as myself, who thought it was important to ask questions about climate change orthodoxy and the radical "solutions" being proposed.

Cameron said was itching to debate the issue and show skeptical journalists and scientists that they were wrong.

“I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads," he said in an interview.

Well, a few weeks ago Mr. Cameron seemed to honor his word.

His representatives contacted myself and two other well known skeptics, Marc Morano of the Climate Depot website and Andrew Breitbart, the new media entrepreneur.

Mr. Cameron was attending the AREDAY environmental conference in Aspen Colorado 19-22 August. He wanted the conference to end with a debate on climate change. Cameron would be flanked with two scientists. It would be 90 minutes long. It would be streamed live on the internet.

They hoped the debate would attract a lot of media coverage.

"We are delighted to have Fox News, Newsmax, The Washington Times and anyone else you'd like. The more the better," one of James Cameron's organizers said in an email.

It looked like James Cameron really was a man of his word who would get to take on the skeptics he felt were so endangering humanity.

Everyone on our side agreed with their conditions. The debate was even listed on the AREDAY agenda.

But then as the debate approached James Cameron's side started changing the rules.

They wanted to change their team. We agreed.

They wanted to change the format to less of a debate—to "a roundtable". We agreed.

Then they wanted to ban our cameras from the debate. We could have access to their footage. We agreed.

Bizarrely, for a brief while, the worlds most successful film maker suggested that no cameras should be allowed-that sound only should be recorded. We agreed

Then finally James Cameron, who so publicly announced that he "wanted to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out," decided to ban the media from the shoot out.

He even wanted to ban the public. The debate/roundtable would only be open to those who attended the conference.

No media would be allowed and there would be no streaming on the internet. No one would be allowed to record it in any way.

We all agreed to that.

And then, yesterday, just one day before the debate, his representatives sent an email that Mr. "shoot it out " Cameron no longer wanted to take part. The debate was cancelled.

James Cameron's behavior raises some very important questions.

Does he genuinely believe in man made climate change? If he believes it is a danger to humanity surely he should be debating the issue every chance he gets ?