Travels With Susan

Recent revelations from the Climate Research Unit at the United Kingdom's East Anglia University, sometimes known as the Pentagon of golobal warming research, completely undermine the entire theory of global warming. The most important revelation, made in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, is that the raw data on which the theory of global warming is based has been "LOST"  Yeah.  I know.  All caps means shouting.  I'M SHOUTING.

Lets talk a little bit about science.  I'm not a scientist, but my son and daughter-in-law are.  Both have Master

's degrees in geology from a University well known for its geology department.  I'll agree, not that impressive compared to the guys who are promoting the global warming theory.  But what I learned from them is just a little bit about the protocols for scientific research.  My son conducted research on ophiolites.  Ophiolites are formations of magma which was once under the ocean and is now on dry land.  Where it is easier to get samples.   So, my son travelled to Oregon two summers in a row and hiked and camped and took samples and kept notes.  Once he took a sample he made a record of where he found it and labeled it.  He took pictures of the area where he found it.  He took all the samples and pictures back to a laboratory at the University and had slides made from each sample.  He looked at each slide and made notes about each slide.  He then wrote a thesis which, I confess, I do not understand.  My daughter-in-law followed the same process.  Each was awarded a master's degree.  As part of that process, ALL of the samples, notes, slides and photos were made available to anyone who wants to look at them.  If someone doubts that his notes are correct about a slide made from a sample, that person can go and pull that slide out and look at it himself.  

This is a key, essential part of the process.  If someone doubts that the sample he pulled is really representative of the area from which he pulled it, that person can go to the same place and pull another sample.  In other words, ALL of his work, from beginning to end, is open to challenge.  And that is the way modern responsible science is conducted.  People conduct a study and draw conclusions and publish them.  But ALL of the data they use is kept and made available to other scientists.  Sometimes scientists will use the data collected by other scientists.  Some other scientist, wanting samples, might go to the university and ask them let them look at the samples.  

That is how science is conducted.  In the case of global warming, you will hear something about tree ring data.  Some of the scientists who propounded the theory of man -made global warming used the data gathered by other scientists from trees.  But, in one case, there were many samples, but the pro global warming people used only 12.  They give no reason as to why they selected those 12.  This was a scandal before the data from the CRU was made available.  Now, when we find that much of the raw data on which the global warming hypothesis has been based was allegedly thrown out because it takes up too much room.  

So we are asked to take their numbers on faith and their theory on faith.  NO. That's not science.  We need hearings on these factual scientific issues.  

And, while the debate goes on, we need to remember a few basic scientific principles-- The first one is correlation is not causation.  In other words, I can show you that virtually 100% of heroin users lived on milk early in their lives.  That doesn't mean that consuming milk causes heroin addiction because everyone lives on milk when they are babies.  Everyone.  

So, the fact that the globe is getting warmer, if that is a fact, at the same time that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing, doesn't mean that the increase in carbon dioxide is causing global warming. For example, we usually see an increase in auto accidents on holidays.  That doesn't mean that holidays cause auto accidents.  It means there are more cars on the road during holidays and, during some holidays there are more drunk drivers on the road.  Even then, it is not drinking per se that causes auto accidents, you can be drunk in a car and be perfectly safe.  What you can't be is drunk in a car and DRIVING the car.  So it is drunk driving which causes people to have reduced judgment, cognition and coordination which leads to increased auto accidents.  Interestingly, driving while sleepy may cause as many accidents because lack of sleep can cause the same loss of cognition, judgment and coordination.  There are a lot of other things going on that affect the atmosphere.

CAn the result be replicated?-- the gold standard for proving a theory is that it predicts behavior.  You might have a theory about the combination of pure sodium and water causing a flame to appear.  I can test your theory by doing what you did. If no flame appears, then, most probably the flame was caused by something else.  Of course, if you have taken any basic chemistry you know that the flame will appear.  When you are studying the weather you can't cause weather to happen in the same way you can cause sodium and water to flare up, so scientists have to rely, in part on the fossil and geological record of temperatures.  That's an instability right there because different people see things differently.  But, beyond that, if your theory is any good you should be able to predict the future in some limited way.  Like, if the theory of gravity is correct, when I let go of the pen in my hand, it should drop to the floor. So, one of the big holes in the anthropogenic global warming theory is that the earth has been getting cooler for the last 10 years.  HMMMM>All their models said it would keep getting warmer.  There are a lot of wholes.

What, apparently, is uncontested, is that we really don't know enough about the weather to make the kind of causation analysis we can make with, for example, pneumococcus as the cause of pneumonia.  There are plenty of scientists, climatologist, physicists and other disciplines who think the anthropogenic (man made) global warming theory is just wrong.  The global warming proponents have been working hard to suppress their views.  We need to hear them and let them speak and then see who has the best facts.

Politico 44 slants the story on the latest Gallup polls on America staying Afghanistan

Click to read more ...

Hugh asks and we provide :  Here is a list of Congressional Representatives who are Democrats who were elected from Congressional Districts which also voted for John Mc Cain in the last election.  Data is from here and here 

One of the comments that Rush actually did make about the NFL was that "all too often"  which means something happens more than it should, the games look like a contest between the Crips and the Bloods without weapons.   Here is a fuller context of that quote.  He was talking about unnecessary violence on the field.  (Called by referees of the game, penalties etc.  ) and he was talking about general lack of class and disrespect of the game by a number of players.  I don't follow NFL games so, without reading the context, I was unaware of the problem, which is perceived by many not just a few.  

And NFL players and others are openly admitting that Rush's politics are the problem.  So here's the deal all you NFL fans.  Race has obviously never mattered to you when it counts-- that is when you go to buy tickets because the majority of fans are white and the majority of players aren't.  But you still go to the games because you want your team to win and you want it to have the best players regardless of race.  All of those millionaire players owe their positions on those teams to the fact that, at least in sports, at least until now, race wasn't a criterion.  Performance and talent were what earned you a place on an NFL team.  And if the most talented and accomplished players are more often Black, so be it.  They will be recognized with money and contracts.  But that's not enough.  The players now want to dictate the politics of the owners of the team. 

Someone who sings filthy racist lyrics, (Think Fergie, think JLO) is perfectly welcome.  Someone who is a Republican, not so much unless he keeps his mouth shut.  So here is the question.  Why are you still supporting the NFL with your time and money.

the attacks on Rush are attacks on free speech and on his listeners and fans.

Click to read more ...