How Can People Be So Stupid? Rotating Header Image

January, 2010:

It’s About Time Some Politicians Are Waking Up To The Threat Of Islam and Sharia Law

Jan 16th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

It is very refreshing to see that at least some politicians in the world are waking up to the extreme and pervasive threat posed by Islam and Sharia law. Of course, I don’t expect our (at least at one time) Muslim President, Barack Obama, to adopt this policy. In fact, he is doing everything he can to appease the Muslims, which is just the wrong thing to do.

As far back as Thomas Jefferson, leaders of this country realized the threat from Islam. Of course, back then, Muslims would simply not have been tolerated in this country if they did not assimilate into the culture. And, of course, the founding fathers, like Jefferson and Franklin, especially, were atheists. (Of course, not many Americans, today, realize that. Technically, they were deists, and believed that there was a “supreme being or force” that set the universe in motion a long time ago, but it has had nothing to do with the earth, or humans, since then. They certainly did not believe in any sort of personal God. In fact, Franklin discusses this in his autobiography, and says it was hard for him to abandon religion because his father had been a preacher. Jefferson made his own version of the Bible, in which he removed all matter that pertained to the supernatural. Of course, there was not much left to his Bible after that.)

Anyway, a UPI article, published today, January 16, 2010, is titled “British party calls for ban on burkas”. Finally, politicians standing up against the expansion of Islam, and creeping Sharia law!In part, the article states:

“We are taking expert advice on how we could do it,” UKIP leader Malcolm Pearson

told the newspaper. “It makes sense to ban the burka — or anything which conceals a woman’s face — in public buildings. But we want to make it possible to ban them in private buildings. It isn’t right that you can’t see someone’s face in an airport.”

The Times said the UKIP is the first British party to call for an all-out ban on burkas although the far-right British National Party believes advocates banning them from schools.

“We are not Muslim bashing, but this is incompatible with Britain’s values of freedom and democracy,” Pearson said.

In a similar way, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said recently that burkas are “not welcome” in France. This was discussed in a January 14, 2010 article in the BBC. In part, the article states:

His UMP party is to put forward a bill this month banning the wearing of the Islamic veil in public, as a means of defending France against “extremists”.

Mr Sarkozy said the first step should be for parliament to adopt a resolution that would unequivocally condemn the burka – and then move on to considering a ban.

He said no decision should be made until parliament hears the results of a six-month commission on whether a law banning such garments from public places was needed.

This is not a new topic in France, either. France has been suffering for years under an ever-increasing Muslim population.

Home to Europe’s largest Muslim population, France in 2004 banned burkas and other “conspicuous” religious symbols in state schools and by public employees.

If the Western, civilized world does not wake up to the threat of Islam, and do something serious about it, we are going to be in very deep trouble. As their population expands (deliberately to spread Islam), we are going to find ourselves with more and more terrorist atrocities, even within our own country. The only way we can fight this growing danger is to simply not allow it to flourish, starting with restrictions on things like the burka, followed by the shutting down of madrases and the very close monitoring of mosques (most of which have been radicalized), as well as very strict controls on immigration from Muslim nations. In fact, this may have to be extended to a complete ban on immigration from Muslim countries, because of the danger posed by the Islamic ideology. And, this is not a matter of religious freedom, because Islam is not just a religion; it is an ideology, like Nazism or Communism. It defines virtually all of your activities on every day, and it is a system of law and government. And, it’s adherents are taught that they MUST take over the world, and wage war on the unbelievers until the whole world is Islamic. Unfortunately, most Americans simply do not realize this. They think that Islam is like Christianity or Judaism, where you mind your business and go to church or mosque a few times a month. But that is where they are wrong. Islam is out to rule the world, and unless we can eliminate it from the world, we must learn to control and contain it.

Banning the burka would be a good starting point. It is nothing more than a sign of the oppression of women in Islam.

America To Islam: You Attack, We Destroy

Jan 10th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

It has been going on for too long; the “imaginary war” with Islam. It is time that we woke up, and smelled the coffee. We are at war with Islam. We are at war with Muslims. We have been for over 30 years, even since Jimmy Carter failed to respond to the takeover of our embassy in Tehran. That was the point when the Muslim cat was let out of the box. Up until then, we had the Muslims “more or less” contained. They were “in a box” so to speak. In other words, since the destruction of the caliphate by Ataturk, Muslims had been contained, and had to behave by “normal” standards of civility. After 1979, all of that went away. After 1979, Muslims felt empowered to reach out and destroy the civilized world.

Now, we have to pick up the pieces. All over the world, we have the OIC, the Organization of the Islamic Conference. These are, basically, the people who will plead innocence to any Islamic atrocity.

So, anyway, what are we to do? I would suggest that we tell the Muslims that IF they attack us, or Israel, or any of our allies in the world, that we will IMMEDIATELY DESTROY MECCA. Thus, the Haj is done, since there will be no place to visit. We must further instruct them that if attacks on the West continue, then other “holy” sites will be obliterated. We should have done this a long time ago, but we must do it NOW if these 7th century Cretans still intend to affect our lives.

We are not at their mercy, they are at ours, as long as we still have the balls to admit it.

The best gift from Obama to America in 2010: bin Laden is DEAD! Islam is DEAD!

Unfortunately, I am not holding my breath. I think he is rooting for the bad guys.

Lecture From CERN Describes How Cosmic Rays Likely Cause Of Climate Change (Not CO2)

Jan 10th, 2010
by EdTroy.
1 comment

This is an interesting lecture that I found. Now, if you are a global warmingista, how do you explain this? Here we have climates changing, and temperatures changing, without the evil influence of mankind. The more I see, the more disgusted I get with the global warmingistas and their political corruption of science! This is all about Al Gore and the IPCC’s power grab. Remember him? He is the guy who uses 20 times more electricity than the typical American family. Do you think that a $2000/month electric bill is normal? Personally, I think that my average electric bill of $250 is too high, but obviously it is extremely reasonable, since it is much less than Al’s, and he is the poster child for global warming and saving the earth.

Anyway, this lecture is from CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research). Specifically, it is from the CERN Colloquium, which was held on June 4, 2009. It is presented by Jasper Kirkby, of CERN.  It may be a bit too technical for non-scientists, but it brings up some very interesting data, as well as ideas on what might really be the reason for climate change. After all, it has been a lot cooler in the past, and it has also been warmer. Also, CO2 levels have been higher in the past. As I showed in an earlier post, the relationship that Al Gore tried to show between CO2 and temperature with the Vostok ice cores is a complete lie, since that data clearly shows that CO2 increases after temperature increases. Thus, CO2 has never been the primary driver for temperature.

To make things a little easier to follow, I have also included the lecture notes on this talk from CERN. It contains a lot of the information in the video, but with much more information. Also, it can be viewed and/or printed, for your convenience.

CERN_lecture notes

There are several especially interesting portions of this lecture. The first occurs at about the 7 minute mark. At this time, the graph on page 7 of the lecture notes is discussed. It turns out that very accurate records of the number of sun spots has been kept since the early 1600’s, shortly after the invention of the telescope. This graph shows the number of sun spots between 1600 and 2000. The graph also shows the time periods of the Maunder Minimum and the Little Ice Age. Both of these time periods were recognized, by historical records, as very cold periods of time. Clearly, there is a correlation between sun spot activity and the Maunder Minimum and the Little Ice Age. Furthermore, although not gone into during this talk, the sun is in a very low (unusually low) period of activity at the present time; early 2010. And, we are seeing worldwide cold weather and snow events, some of which have not been seen for decades.

Another interesting portion of the lecture is in the 10 to 14 minute time period. Here, the correlation between GCR (Galactic Cosmic Rays) and temperature is shown over various time periods ranging back as far as 2000 years. A clear correlation can be seen between GCRs and temperature, especially in the Austrian speleotherm data. However, there is no clear correlation between temperature and CO2. The graph on page 9 of the lecture notes shows the relationships between solar and GCRs values and temperature over a 700 year period from Siberia. This shows very good correlation between solar and GCRs variability and temperature, until the last 125 or so years, where the temperature does increase more than the previous data would suggest. This might be due to other forces, such as CO2. But, clearly, there is still a correspondence between temperature and solar/GCRs data, even during that period. If CO2 is causing the additional warming, that would be interesting to know, but it clearly shows that CO2 is not the dominant controller of global temperature.

At about the 24:40 point in the video, the data on page 15 of the lecture notes is discussed. This, again, shows excellent correlation between GCRs and temperature, and this goes back over 500 million years. This graph very clearly shows a correlation between GCRs and temperature. The graph also show CO2, and you can clearly see that there is no clear correlation between temperature and CO2. What is noteworthy in this graph is that we are currently in a cold period, called an “icehouse”, but we seem to be entering another warm period. Additionally, this graph indicates that global temperatures, on a geologic time scale, have tended to be much warmer than they are today. The cold periods are clearly short lived phenomenon. The peaks in GCRs, and the delayed, but corresponding global “icehouse” periods, occur about every 140 to 150 million years. This time period corresponds to the time it takes the solar system to travel from one spiral arm of the Milky Way Galaxy to another arm of that galaxy. The solar system is not locked in position in the galaxy. Rather, it orbits the galaxy, moving from one arm to another arm about every 140 million years.

At about the 37 minute point, the data on page 22 of the lecture notes is discussed. Several things are significant in looking at the graph of surface temperature from 1978 to the present. The most obvious thing to notice is that the red data (corresponding to ground based thermometers) is consistently higher (and some times significantly higher) than the satellite determined data. Given the extreme difficulty of accurately measuring air temperature with a thermometer, and given the fact that we know that many measurement sites are corrupted by nearby sources of heat, and given that we know that some of the techniques used by the global warmingistas to “adjust” temperature data are poor at best, and completely fraudulent at worst, I think we have to learn to concentrate on the satellite data, since it is global in scope, and not affected by the measurement and siting errors so common with ground-based thermometer measurements. (If you think measuring temperature on the ground with a simple thermometer is simple, try an experiment I propose in another article.)

Another critical fact that the global warmingistas do not want you to know is the total failure  of their models compared to actual data. This is shown in the graphs on the right hand side of the page. The top graph depicts what the temperature should be as a function of altitude and latitude given a particular concentration of CO2. The bottom graph shows the actual, measured data. Even a child could tell that these graphs are not even close. Thus, the models that the global warmingistas depend upon to predict future temperatures do not even work with today’s situation! And, of course, as mentioned earlier, the models all predict a dramatic rise in temperature over the last 10 years, but we have not seen that. This is what Phil Jones referred to as a “travesty” in one of the leaked CRU documents.

A very interesting point was brought up in the lecture at about the 41 minute mark. This was a reference to a 2005 paper by William Livingston and Matthew Penn of the National Solar Observatory in Tucson, Arizona. Unfortunately, the paper did not pass peer review, so it was not published. Jasper Kirkby made a somewhat sarcastic comment about how he could not imagine why it would not pass peer review;  “must have offended the sense of scientific orthodoxy..” Remember, this talk was put together in June of 2009. Although many of us knew that the global warmingista cabal was actively preventing the publication of excellent papers if they did not support the man-made global warming mantra. Of course, I suspect he knew the reason, and that was the reason for the comment. Now, thanks to Climategate, and the release of the CRU e-mails and files, the whole world knows the most likely reason this paper did not receive peer review and publication. It was almost certainly blocked, but it’s data and conclusions are extremely valuable, and may offer a realistic clue to a significant cause of climate change, which is not CO2.  A very interesting follow-up to this article, by the original authors, but with data extended to 2009, is at this location. The critical graph from the follow-up article is shown below. It is the same graph as shown on page 24 of the lecture notes (labeled “Sunspot Magnetic Field (G)), but this graph extends the time scale out to 2009, and shows that the trend described in their 2005 paper is continuing. The main point of this paper is that the sun may be entering another very quiet period, with few or no sun spots, which would be similar to the Maunder Minimum. If this is true, and if GCRs may, in fact, be one of the major modulators of global climate, we may be in for a very cold decade or two. This could be devastating to many people in the world. Cold periods have always been harder on humans than warm periods for reasons ranging from simply freezing to crop failures and shorter growing seasons.

In fact, in his recent book, “Chill”, author and scientist Peter Taylor predicts a coming “ice age”. Sun spot activities may be the clue. A better understanding of clouds and the effect of clouds on global climate is critical. Clouds are not accurately modeled in the Global Climate Models used by the IPCC and similar groups. The understanding of the function of cosmic rays in the formation of clouds is vital if we are to ever have a chance of actually understanding climate change, let alone predict it.

I am currently reading several very new technical papers relating to this concept that cosmic rays may be one of the most significant drivers of climate change, and I will write about those papers once I have had a chance to digest them and to try to produce information that can be understood by non-scientists.

In a final note, the initial results from the CLOUD experiment were announced in late August, 2011, about 1-1/2 year after I wrote this article, and they validate the theory that cosmic rays play an important role in cloud formation. You can see this new article here.

livingston-penn-chesire_max_field_data_to_2-09

Video: Al Gore Has A Climategate Nervous Breakdown

Jan 6th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

Why We Cannot Win The War On Islam, or The New Crusade, Unless We Identify The Enemy

Jan 4th, 2010
by EdTroy.
9 comments

We have spent decades in a state of denial. It actually started in the 1970’s, with the Olympic massacre. Then, Jimmy Carter let the Muslims have their way in Iran. He did nothing! By then, the Muslims knew that the West had lost it’s way, and that they would never fight to bring right, again. We fought in World War 1, and we won a decisive war against evil. We reluctantly entered World War II, and won a war against fascism and evil. In fact, in World War II, we faced some of the same type of insane ideology that caused many Japanese citizens to become homicide bombers; we just called them “kamikazes”.  But, in the first two world wars, we knew what we were fighting for, and we knew the enemy. I am not going to go into the first world war too much, here, since the history is older, and the lessons of the second world war are more immediate and pressing.

During the second world war, Hitler had decided that he was going to take over the world. He was going to exterminate the Jews. If we had not joined the war effort, there is no doubt that we would be speaking German, and there would no longer be any Jews in the world. But, we not only joined the fight, but we knew who our enemies were, and we identified them. Germany, Italy, and Japan. We took precautions to make sure that Germans and Italians in the United States did not subvert our government; we took steps to minimize the chances that German and Italian spies could learn our secrets. After the treacherous attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, we went to war with Japan. And, we named Japan as an enemy, and we took steps to ensure that the Japanese citizens in the United States could not transmit information to the Japanese government. We put them in internment camps. For this, America has been denigrated. But, we knew it must be done. We did it, and we won the war. Could we have won the war if we did not do this? I don’t know. Frankly, I don’t care. It was a small price to pay for ensuring that our security was not violated. We are now not only not watching Muslims in America, but we are actually allowing them into our military, our security services, and our government itself. As we know, this has had disastrous results, culminating with the murder spree of Major Nidal Hasan in Ft. Hood, but also including the treachery of Muslim interpreters who not only deliberately slowed down and falsified translations, but who also openly celebrated the attacks on the United States by Osama bin Laden on 9/11. How stupid can we be. We must identify and marginalize the enemy if we ever intend to win this war on Islam.

Today, we are at war with Islam. But, who tells you that? Barack Obama (at least at one time a Muslim)? NO! George Bush, widely denigrated for torturing “prisoners” who were not really prisoners, because they did not fall under the Geneva Convention? NO! (He probably came the closest to saying the truth, that it is a war on Islam, but he never could quite bring himself to say it.) Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, or even John McCane? No, nobody is telling you the truth. Not only do they not tell you the truth, but they don’t even allow truthful words to be spoken. A while ago, Obama stated that the “war on terror” is no longer to be called a “war on terror”; it is an overseas contingency operation! SAY WHAT? Are you kidding me? That is like in the old days when you could not call a “walk in closet” a “walk in closet” because you might “offend” somebody in a wheel chair! To make it even more absurd, “big sister” Janet Napolitano declared that terrorist incidents  could no longer be called terrorist incidents. They had to be called “man-caused” disasters. How totally stupid is that?! Well, we found out on December 25, 2009, when a crazed Muslim homicide bomber tried to blow himself up on Northwest flight 253, en route from Amsterdam to Detroit, better known as Detroitistan. And, the blogger who leaked the TSA document that mentioned a “terrorist” attack was threatened by jack booted federal agents to identify the source of the leak. Apparently, Napolitano had her panties in a knot because someone had the balls to use the term “terrorist” instead of “man-made disaster” in an internal memo. Obviously, one of Obama’s first moves in the new year must be to fire Napolitano.

What upsets me more than most things about this atrocity is that Napolitano had the audacity to say the the “system worked”, but she also sicked the TSA and federal agents on some bloggers who reported on the fact that some poor, unfortunate employee at the TSA did not get the “message” and released a classified briefing bulletin that used the dreaded word “terrorist”, instead of “man-caused disaster makers”, as I reported. I kid you not!

Before we go any further, lets get some things straight. There is no war on terror. There is no war on “man-made” disasters. There is no “overseas contingency operation.” We are at war with Islam. We are at war with Muslims. This is a new Crusade. The enemies of Western civilization (Muslims) have declared war on us. They have basically said that we must convert to Islam, pay the jizya and live as dhimmis, or be killed. Period. It really is very simple. Have you heard any mainstream Muslim group deny this? Of course not. Have you heard CAIR deny this? Of course not. In fact, the co-founder of CAIR, Omar Ahmad, and the long-time chairman of CAIR, stated, in 1998:

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant,” and, “The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

Clearly, this is one sick, deranged, person. But, he is one of the foremost spokesmen for Islam in the United States!The main stream media, as well as government agencies, refer to CAIR, and bow down to CAIR. FBI agents even have to remove their shoes when entering a mosque! How stupid is that? That is sending exactly the wrong message; the message that we respect their barbarian, 7th century ideology. We do not, or at least we certainly should not. We must get over this leftist relativism where all cultures and civilizations and ideas are equal. They are not. Some are superior, and some are simply representative of 7th century barbarism and misogyny.

The most important thing that the Western World must realize about Islam is that it IS NOT a religion. It is, like Nazism, an ideology. But, Islam is even worse than Nazism, in that it defines what you do every minute of your day. It even tells you what foot to use when entering the bathroom, and what foot to use when leaving, as well as what hands or fingers to use while you are in that bathroom. Unlike normal religions, Islam is a religion, a system of law, and a system of government. That is why it cannot be considered a “religion”, and is thus not protected by freedom of religion in the United States. Islam has been hiding behind this protection for too long, and it is time that people wake up and realize that Islam is much more than just a religion.

Bin Laden also declared war on America. What is it about a declaration of war that we refuse to understand? When are we finally going to realize that we are at war with Islam? Maybe when we are all sticking out asses in the air waiting to be fucked by Allah and banging our heads on the rug so that we can have that ugly “whatever” on our foreheads that you see on Ayman al-Zawahiri, as well as many current and dead terrorists?

The situation is simple. We are at war with Islam. We have been for almost 4 decades. We’ve been at war with Islam for most of the last 1300 years. We just had them contained, in a box so to speak, for the last couple of hundred years. But, we let our guard down, and they got bold, again, wanting to recreate the old “glory days” when they had conquered and subjugated most of the civilized world. There are those that will say, “No, we are at war with “radical” Islam”. But, as the Prime Minister of Turkey, Erdogan,  a former friend and ally of the United States so famously stated a few months ago:

“These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

So, there you have it from the horses mouth, so to speak. Islam is Islam. In other words, you cannot be a Muslim and denounce Jihad, or Holy War, because that is at the very foundation of Islam. Islam was found by the sword, and Islam will die by the sword (or a few hundred nuclear weapons.)

Americans have been amazingly patient up until this time. The Muslim world is lucky that America did not demand the destruction of Islam in 2001. It is a shame it did not, because there are only three ways this can work out.

1) Islam is destroyed. That is, the Muslim population of the world is simply eliminated. This is what was done to the Aztec’s, with their barbaric human sacrifice. Today, we have no Aztecs and their barbaric human sacrifice.

2) Islam has a reformation. That is, it goes back and realizes that it is an ancient, barbaric religion based in the 7th century world. It will go and strike from it’s beliefs all violent phrases and teachings, and will grant equal rights to women, and will treat people of other faiths, or of non-faith, with total respect and dignity. (I am not betting on this one.)

3) Muslims are “re-educated”, and taught that their “prophet” was nothing more than a common barbarian pedophile. He was not the messenger of god, he was not the perfect man, and his sayings were nothing more than the rantings of a schizophrenic. This is basically what we did with the Japanese after World War II. (Of course, a bit of solution 1 had to be applied before the Japanese recognized the wisdom of solution 3.)

My guess, in the end, is that the Muslim solution will consist of a bunch of situation 1, followed by a bit of situation 3, pretty much like what had to be done with the Japanese. But, in the case of the Japanese, it eventually resulted in a great friendship, mutual respect, and a great trading situation.

In any case, I do not see any other solution. Our government does a huge disservice to all people involved when they refuse to name the enemy. Without naming the enemy, you cannot possibly hope to defeat them. We hear, repeatedly, how “prisoners” from Gitmo go back to become terrorists. Well of course they do. We do nothing in Gitmo to “decondition” them, as we would do with other people trapped in a cult. We should treat prisoners in Camp Gitmo as brain-washed victims of a cult, which they are. (The cult of Islam.) But, instead of trying to break their ties to Islam, we do just the opposite. We treat the Koran with respect; extreme respect. This is a mistake, since we do not respect the Koran, or their religion. Rather than only handling the Koran in white gloves, which gives the exact wrong impression, we should issue Koranic toilet paper. That is, each page of the toilet paper would contain a page of the Koran. Instead of offering them Imams that help them to further their jihad, we should offer them serious psychological reprogramming sessions, basically what you would offer to other victims of a cult.

If we are not willing to reprogram the “detainees” at Gitmo, to eliminate their Muslim tendencies, then we should just shoot them; take no prisoners. In the end, as I said, we have 3 choices. We must choose among them. If we don’t choose, then choice one is the default solution, because it then becomes kill or be killed, and we will not be killed.

If You Think It is Simple To Measure Outside Temperature With A Thermometer, Try This Experiment

Jan 3rd, 2010
by EdTroy.
5 comments

What is the temperature outside? It certainly sounds like a simple enough question. But, have you ever actually tried to measure outside temperature? What a silly question. Of course you have. Virtually every home has an outside thermometer. Often, it is attached to the outside of the kitchen window, so you can easily see whether you need to bundle up, or put on shorts. And, that is fine. But, how many times have you looked at that thermometer, when there is snow on the ground and the local weather station is stating that it is 25 degrees Fahrenheit, and seen a reading of 35 degrees? Or, maybe even higher. Is your thermometer that bad? No. It is probably just “in the sun.” Very few people realize just how much energy the sun places on any given portion of the earth. On average, the sun deposits about 1000 watts per square meter at the surface of the earth on a clear day. That is a lot of power! (And, that is why solar panels offer so much hope for a sustainable energy future if their cost can be reduced, and/or their efficiency increased.) But, if that power is applied to a thermometer that is exposed to the sun, it will raise the temperature of the thermometer, and thus the temperature that it indicates, above the actual temperature of the air. Plus, the fact that the thermometer is mounted to your house will affect it’s reading (up or down, depending on the temperature of your house as compared to the ambient air.) In addition, since it is mounted on a window, you will have some air leaking out of the house, and that air will change the thermometer’s reading. Again, if it is winter, and the inside of your house is warmer than the outside air (hopefully your case), then that leakage air will tend to increase the temperature indicated by the thermometer.

So, we see that a thermometer mounted on your kitchen window is not a good way to measure outdoor air temperature, especially if you intend to measure temperature to an accuracy of less than 0.3 degrees F, or so. (Remember, in all of this global warming brouhaha, we are talking temperature changes of much less than 1 degree Celsius, which is about 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit. So, if we are going to have data that is meaningful in any way, we must be able to measure temperature to an accuracy of at least 0.2 degrees Celsius, or about 0.3 degrees Fahrenheit.)

So, the thermometer attached to the kitchen window, in the sun, does not work. OK, lets place the thermometer in your patio, under a roof, so that it is not in the sun. That should be better. But, is your patio on a concrete slab? Did you mount the thermometer on a wooden post that supports the roof that is exposed to the sun? Is there sufficient air circulation under your patio roof to ensure that the heat absorbed by the roof is not raising the temperature under the roof, even though the area is not enclosed, slightly? Truly, there are a lot of variables.

So, what I would suggest is a simple experiment. Go out and buy 6 to 10 identical thermometers. Then, put them in a common location in your house where they will not be exposed to sunlight. Then, after they have had a few hours to settle, record the temperature of each. If your room is at 70 degrees F, you might get readings like 70.2, 68, 69, 71, 70.8, 69.2. Thus, they are all reading about 70 degrees, but there are some accuracy problems. (If you are using a simple liquid based thermometer, you may not be able to read them to anything like this degree of accuracy. This is a problem in itself, but you can make the most accurate readings that your eyes can determine.) This data, by itself, is not very meaningful. It only means that compared to thermometer A, thermometer B reads 2.2 degrees lower, etc. You need to record this information. If you really want to be scientific, you must measure your “standards” at a number of temperatures, but this will be difficult unless you want to vary the temperature inside you home by a wide range. (You could open the windows on a winter day, or night, to let the house cool down and make additional “calibration” measurements; just don’t let the pipes burst.)

Anyway, so now you have your thermometers, and you know how each “reads” relative to the other. Now, place them in different places on your property. Put at least one in a ludicrous location, such as one where it will be in full sunlight almost all day. Place the others in locations where you think you will get a “real” surface air temperature. Then, for a period of a few weeks, record the readings of your thermometers as accurately as you can. And, make sure you make those measurements at the same time for all thermometers. (Yes, it may take a few minutes to record all measurements, but don’t record thermometer A at 10 am and thermometer B at 10:15 am. Hopefully, you can record them all within a 5 or 6 minute period.) Also, make sure you make a few measurements after the sun has gone down.

I have no way to know what your results will be, but I suspect this exercise will give you some appreciation for the difficulty of accurately measuring outside, surface air temperatures. (Officially, outside air temperatures are to be measured at 2 meters height above the ground, but the exact height is not critical, as long as it is at least 1.5 meters above the ground, and less than 3 meters above the ground.) I suspect that you will find that measurements are much closer after the sun has set. This is important, since it demonstrates the inaccuracies that can be injected due to solar heating. Also, I suspect that you will find that one location seems to be the coolest during the day. This is probably the most accurate location for taking outside surface temperature data. You will probably notice that it is located in a position that is far from any possible heat sources, such as asphault or concrete or buildings or air conditioners. It is also in a shaded location that has good air flow.

While your results may vary, it is important to recognize that almost all of your measurement errors are going to be on the high side. That is, it is virtually impossible to get an outside air temperature reading that is consistently too low, but very easy to get one that is too high. This is one reason to question the data from the GISS and the Hadley center, since they are based on very error prone ground based thermometer measurements. In addition, as has been well documented, a huge percentage of the ground based temperature data is based on sites that are improperly located in relation to artificial heating, such as asphalt parking lots, roof tops, and air conditioner outlets.

Meteorologist Dr. Neil Frank’s Take On Climategate: You Should Be Steamed

Jan 3rd, 2010
by EdTroy.
1 comment

Another prominent scientist, Dr. Neil Frank, has come out to criticize the CRU and their politically driven “science”. And, as a meteorologist,  he is well qualified to speak on matters pertaining to the climate. In the article he points out very clearly that the climate models cannot even accurately predict weather 5 to 10 days out, let alone 100 years out. On top of that, he points out that the models used by the IPCC clearly predicted significant warming over the last 10 years, but that has not happened.

The article starts out:

Now that Copenhagen is past history, what is the next step in the man-made global warming controversy? Without question, there should be an immediate and thorough investigation of the scientific debauchery revealed by “Climategate.”

If you have not heard, hackers penetrated the computers of the Climate Research Unit, or CRU, of the United Kingdom’s University of East Anglia, exposing thousands of e-mails and other documents. CRU is one of the top climate research centers in the world. Many of the exchanges were between top mainstream climate scientists in Britain and the U.S. who are closely associated with the authoritative (albeit controversial) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.

He goes on to point out how the core IPCC scientists marginalized the skeptics, and essentially took over the peer-review process, thus preventing the scientific work of skeptics from being published. He also points out that there have been many petitions by various groups of scientists stating that the science is not “settled” and that there is no solid proof for man-made global warming. He mentions that more than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231 page Senate minority report questioning anthropogenic global warming. Additionally, more than 200 scientists objected to the American Physical Society stand in support of man-made global warming. (I am one of those 200 scientists. That list also contains at least 1 Nobel Prize laureate.)

The article goes on:

What do the skeptics believe? First, they concur with the believers that the Earth has been warming since the end of a Little Ice Age around 1850. The cause of this warming is the question. Believers think the warming is man-made, while the skeptics believe the warming is natural and contributions from man are minimal and certainly not potentially catastrophic à la Al Gore.

Second, skeptics argue that CO2 is not a pollutant but vital for plant life. Numerous field experiments have confirmed that higher levels of CO2 are positive for agricultural productivity. Furthermore, carbon dioxide is a very minor greenhouse gas. More than 90 percent of the warming from greenhouse gases is caused by water vapor. If you are going to change the temperature of the globe, it must involve water vapor.

Third, and most important, skeptics believe that climate models are grossly overpredicting future warming from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide. We are being told that numerical models that cannot make accurate 5- to 10-day forecasts can be simplified and run forward for 100 years with results so reliable you can impose an economic disaster on the U.S. and the world.

Read the whole article.

Finally, Some Truth From Afghanistan: Heroin Fix Drives Taliban

Jan 2nd, 2010
by EdTroy.
5 comments

If we ever want to actually defeat the Taliban (and I don’t think we do, for what ever twisted reasons the powers to be hold), the simple solution is to destroy the Poppy fields in Afghanistan. Everyone knows that the only cash crop grown by Afghanistan is Poppies, to be used to produce heroin. Eliminate the Poppies, and you totally wipe out Afghanistan’s source of income. (For those morons who don’t understand this, that means, if you wipe out the poppies, you cut off the funding for the Taliban. No more Taliban, no more war in Afghanistan.)

This article points out:

The simplest and safest way to thwart an enemy’s ability to conduct war is to destroy their supply lines. This is an old and useful tactic from the time of King Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562) of Babylon. His armies would surround their hapless victims who had taken refuge in forts, cut off all supplies, including water and food, until famine weakened their army, and then attack. This is a brutal but effective military ploy. We have been in Afghanistan for eight years—and neither the Bush administration nor the Obama administration has effectively utilized this strategy.The solution to winning the war in Afghanistan is to destroy the Taliban’s ability to make war, causing the decimation of the Taliban war machine. The Taliban’s supply lines are the poppy fields. Eliminating those fields as a source of income would strike a fatal blow to the Taliban.

The Taliban are mafia drug-lords wrapped in Middle-Eastern freedom-fighter apparel. They generate $100 to $150 million annually by imposing “taxes” on opium farmers. Selling and exporting opium raises $700 to $800 million annually for the Taliban.  This allows for the purchase of arms for insurgency, terrorism and black-market tyranny. Worldwide, Afghan heroin fuels 93 percent of a $65 billion trade, far surpassing all of Mexico, Southeast Asia and South America combined. The United Nations estimates between 15 to 21 million people use this highly addictive drug. Afghan heroin alone kills over 100,000 people each year, outweighing the U.S. combat losses of Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Grenada and Vietnam combined.

Until recently, people have argued that we cannot destroy the poppy fields, since that would destroy the economy of Afghanistan. Aside from the obvious fact that destroying the economy of Afghanistan should be a major goal of the free world, if that economy is built on heroin trade, the fact remains that Afghanistan farmers are simply business men. If an illegal drug brings them fortune, they will grow it; if other, legal crops, bring prosperity, they will grow them. We need to encourage them to grow legal crops.

One of the fiercest arguments against the destruction of Afghanistan poppy fields is that if opium production is eliminated it will destroy the Afghanistan economy. First, no one makes that argument for Mexican drug-dealers or marijuana cultivators in California.  Second, if the crops were removed the Taliban would collapse, Afghanistan would become safe and foreign investment money would flow into that country. More to the point, Afghan farmer’s gross revenues from opium is about $1 billion dollars according to 2007 U.N. estimates, while our 2007 U.S. Military operations cost taxpayers $35 billion. Therefore, the plan should be: burn the fields, crush the Taliban, send the boys home, send one billion in aid and save $34 billion a year.

The U.S. dominates the air in Afghanistan. Poppy fields grow in full sunlight, and forests do not obscure the poppy fields. Eradication efforts will not be hampered by a lack of discovery. Modern herbicides are quite safe and effective, as well as the use of tractors to plow the fields under. When the Afghan farmer is faced with the choice of taking U.S. assistance to grow legal crops or face total eradication of his crops and imprisonment, he will be far more motivated than he currently is to switch his crops.

In the past, the United States did not have the ability to eradicate those fields. Now, we are the occupier of Afghanistan and have the capacity and the duty to destroy this trade. Every poppy that grows empowers the Taliban with more artillery that will be used to kill American soldiers and Marines. No one has more power than Mr. Obama to dispatch the largest source of heroin export in the world. If he really wants get out of Afghanistan and cares about our troops, he must destroy those fields.

Read the whole article. This brings some sanity to an insane part of the world.

Scientist Peter Taylor Predicts Global Cooling Like Maunder Minimum

Jan 2nd, 2010
by EdTroy.
4 comments

In his recent book, Chill, scientist Peter Taylor predicts that the world may be heading for another deep chill, similar to the Maunder Minimum that started in the 17th century. Unlike the dire predictions of the global warmingistas, another major cooling cycle could be a disaster for mankind. While people and animals tend to thrive in warm climates, and warm climates result in longer growing seasons for plants, a major cooling would have disastrous results.

The graph below shows the global temperature over the last 11,000 years. It was compiled by David Archibald after Dansgaard, et al (1969) and Schönwiese (1995). The Maunder Minimum can clearly be seen, labeled as the “Little Ice Age”. During this time, the Thames River froze over frequently, as did the Hudson River. (Remember, during the Revolutionary war, Washington was able to get cannons across the Hudson River by simply pushing them across the frozen ice.)
HoloceneTemperatures_11k_back_schonwiese

In a recent article in the Daily Mail, “Copenhagen climate change summit: The world is COOLING not warming says scientist Peter Taylor…and we’re not prepared“, it is pointed out that:

Cycles are involved, not short-term trends, and many respected scientists, especially those in Russia and China, think that a cooling cycle is coming.

The AGW brigade have mistaken the current warm period for a trend caused by carbon emissions. But the detailed science says it could be natural and part of a cycle.

Behind the scenes at the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change there is no consensus – the dissenting views have been covered over in the summary documents for policy makers – and among UK and EU politicians it’s even worse, and criminally expensive for the British taxpayer.

At the end, the article ominously warns:

We’re being fatally led up the wrong garden path by green businesses, politicians, the IPCC and their computer geeks with their doctored spreadsheets and forecasts. They need to get out more and study the real world – not their virtual reality – because, like the asset bubbles of the financial crisis, the global warming bubble is about to burst…

Read the whole article.

The Gross Incompetence Of TSA and Intelligence In Underpants Bomber Case Is Stunning

Jan 2nd, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

Here we are, more than 8 years after 9/11, and we are witness to the gross incompetence displayed by intelligence agencies, the TSA, and the airlines in the case of the Underpants Bomber. Watch these two videos. In the first video, Napolitano states that “the system worked. Everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action. Within, literally, an hour to 90 minutes, of the incident occurring, all 128 flights in the air had been notified to take some special measures in light of what had occurred on the Northwest airlines flight.” Here, she not only shows her incompetence, but basically brags about it. Passengers should not have to be responsible for the safety of a flight. That is the job of the TSA. And, if you have a bomb on a plane, obviously the SYSTEM DID NOT WORK! Furthermore, they only notified flights that were inbound from Europe, not domestic flights, and not flights from other locations. Al Qaeda is known for multiple, simultaneous attacks. To not advise every flight is gross incompetence and dereliction of duty. Plus, how could it have taken 60 to 90 minutes to make those notifications? I’ll bet many of the passengers on those flights knew about the attack in less time than that! (And, just think of the problems that could create. I can see it now: “Oh, stewardess, did you know there was a bomb on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit?” “WHAT?? BOMB?? Oh my God, there’s a bomb on the plane…..”)Again, total incompetence. Then, after watching the first video, where Napolitano gives her political doublespeak to hide the systemic failures of the “system”, and to cover up the fact that virtually nothing has been learned since 9/11 except novel new ways to inconvenience and embarrass airline passengers, watch the second video, where the stunning extent of the failures in the system becomes clear. Obama’s first act of 2010 should be to fire Janet Napolitano.

Now, the video that documents the extent of the failures. (Note the s at the end of failure, as in multiple.)

Good News: Axe Wielding Somalian Shot At Kurt Westergaard’s House–Bad News: The Muslim Attacker Survives To Attack Again

Jan 1st, 2010
by EdTroy.
3 comments

This news was just released by CNN on January 1, 2010.

(CNN) — A Somali man was shot as he allegedly tried to enter the home of Danish political cartoonist Kurt Westergaard — known for his controversial depictions of the Muslim prophet Mohammad — on Saturday, police said.

The 27-year-old man, who was not identified, wielded an ax and a knife and cracked a window at Westergaard’s home in Aarhus, said police spokesman Morten Jensen. A home alarm alerted police to the scene at 10 p.m., and they were attacked by the man, he said.

The officers shot the man in the right leg and left hand. He was hospitalized, but was not seriously injured, police said.

Westergaard’s caricature of Mohammed — which depicted the prophet wearing a bomb as a turban with a lit fuse — sparked an uproar among Muslims in early 2006 after newspapers reprinted the images months later as a matter of free speech. The cartoon was first published by the Danish newspaper Morgenavisen Jullands-Posten in September 2005.

Of course, most Americans have no idea what this is all about, because most of the main stream media totally obfuscated the story in 2005 and into 2006. The only  main stream media publication, that I know of, in the United States, to publish the cartoons was the Philadelphia Enquirer. While I am not a fan of the Philly Enquirer (or any newspaper), I have to give them a lot of credit for having the journalistic integrity to at least publish the cartoons that caused so many deaths by followers of an insane, epileptic, barbarian, pedophile named Mohammad. How insane are these people, to go on rampages about harmless cartoons? Did Christians riot, loot, and kill when Jesus was depicted in dung? How many disparaging cartoons and outrages have been committed against Jesus, and other characters beloved by Christians? Many. But, you don’t see Christians rioting, looting, and killing over them. Christians had a reformation, and got over that stuff a few hundred years ago (thank God!)

In fact, the political correctness and fear of Muslims has gone so far that Yale University Press prevented the publication of the Mohammad cartoons in a book about the Mohammad cartoons. How totally absurd is that? If I was the author, I would have told my publisher to go fuck themselves. Unfortunately, the author of this book did not do that. I guess the author needed the money. I discuss this situation in my article “Disgraceful Dhimmitude: Yale University Press Afraid To Publish Muhammad Cartoons In Book About Muhammad Cartoons!” In this post, I include the cartoons in question, along with a few that are more “controversial”. (My favorite is “Mohammad Invents a New Religion”.) Anyway, the one with Mohammad with a bomb in his turban was the one that generated so much “angst” among the pious, “peaceful” Muslims. They claimed that it made Mohammad look like a terrorist. Well, DUH, he was a terrorist! He spent much of his life as a barbarian warrior, killing many (preferably by decapitation) while he, unfortunately, walked the earth. And, his barbarous  legacy continues. Lets face it, 99 times out of 100, when you hear about some bombing or other atrocity committed in the world, there is a Muslim involved.  I am not saying that every Muslim is a terrorist, but virtually every terrorist is a Muslim. A couple of decades ago, it was not so clear, since there were a lot of IRA terrorists committing atrocities. But today, terrorism is almost exclusively the domain of the Muslims. I was not politically aware in the age of the IRA, so I can’t comment on that situation, but it seems to have been resolved, or at least contained. In the case of the Muslims, as the attempted bombing of Northwest flight 253 on Christmas day proves, they are still 7th century barbarians.

It is a shame that Kurt Westergaard does not live in the United States. If he lived here, he would have a right to bear arms; that is, a right to protect himself. If the attack had happened here, Kurt could have dispatched the Somali attacker to his imaginary 72 virgins; in stead, the police arrived and only wounded the attacker, thus allowing him to attack, again. I am amazed that Kurt is still alive. It does speak volumes about the apparent ability of the police in Denmark. But, Denmark is small; what is the expected police response time? I don’t know. In most of America, police response time would be tens of minutes, at least, which would translate to death for the attacked, unless they were armed.

This situation is not only a further indictment of Muslims, but it is another reason why the 2nd amendment is so vitally important. I’m actually surprised that the police got to Westergaard’s house quickly enough to save his life. Lets face it, it only takes a few seconds for an assailant to enter you house. If you can’t defend yourself, your chances are not good. Theo van Gogh found that out on the streets of Holland, when he was brutally stabbed in the chest by a crazed Muslim after making the film “Submission” with Ayan Hirsi Ali, one of the most courageous people to leave Islam. I recommend all of her books. I also show “Fitna” on my site, by Geert Wilders, an incredibly courageous Danish parliamentarian. I do not show “Submission” only because it has some nudity, and thus might not be appropriate to viewers of all ages. It is a great movie, however, and you can find it if you want to.

Fortunately, Muslims Seem To Want To Kill Their Own

Jan 1st, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

It has recently occurred to me that the Muslims seem to be obsessed with killing their own. We all know that most homicide bombers kill, primarily, Muslims. But, how about other bombers and attackers? In the last few days, we  heard that a follower of the insane, epileptic, barbarian, pedophile, commonly known as Mohammad, failed in his attempt to bring down Northwest Flight 253, an airliner that was flying between Amsterdam and Detroitistan. How dumb was that? I obviously have no way of knowing what percentage of the passengers on that jet were Muslims, but I suspect it was higher than the percentage of Muslims on most flights, because it was flying from a place with a high Muslim population, to an American city with one of the largest Muslim populations in the country.

Thus, it stands to reason that an unusually large percentage of the people on that plane were probably Muslim. Thus, his act, if it had succeeded, would have killed many Muslims. Collateral damage, I guess.

We are constantly reminded about all of the deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, as well as other places. Ignoring the deaths of militants, and those unfortunately caught in the crossfire,  the majority of those deaths are Muslims being killed by Muslims. Sometimes it is al Qaeda just trying to stir the pot. More often, it is Shia against Sunni violence, or vice versa. Many of the deaths in Iraq are caused by operatives brought into the country to kill and terrorize by Iran. And, of course, we now see Iran’s “government” killing Iranian citizens by shooting them and running them over with vehicles. And, lets not forget the situation in Palestine. Every time the Israeli’s strike back in self defense, you hear the hollow scream from Hamas and Hezbollah about all of the “civilian” deaths. Well, DUH, if you put rocket launchers in populated areas, or run back to populated areas after performing attacks, civilian casualties are inevitable. Plus, there is no easy way to tell who is a member of Hamas or Hezbollah and who is a “civilian”, since these groups illegally do not wear a uniform. (Or, if they do, they quickly change back into civilian clothes and “blend in” after staging an attack, making their targeting impossible.)

Of course, the fact that they are not part of a nation state’s military, and don’t wear a uniform, makes them, like the Taliban and al Qaeda, ineligible for any Geneva Convention protection. The Geneva Convention only applies to recognized soldiers, wearing a uniform, of a national army.

So, if “innocent civilians” do not want to get killed in the occasional (but increasing), and necessary, Predator missile strikes, don’t hang out with the bad guys.  You know who they are.

Just as I was finishing this article, a got a breaking news text message from CNN. It seems we have another case of Muslims behaving badly, this time in Pakistan. A car bomb reportedly loaded with 600 pounds of explosives blew up at a volleyball match, killing 60 and wounding 60. Just one more, typical, example of Muslims killing Muslims. And, that was clearly targeted to kill Muslims. It was not an attack on US or NATO forces that killed a few Muslims who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.