Common Sense to Climate Change

First, I want to apologize for the previous posts I made about Global Warming facts. I pretty sure most of you didn't understand hardly anything of it. I want to make some sense and help you understand the true facts of Climate Change, and so called Global Warming. The Government move to promote Global Warming and programs to prevent it, is....well, bottom line, to have more power, control, and money. To start, here is a recent news headline that came out today.

A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

The controversy comes after the House of Representatives passed a landmark bill to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one that Inhofe said will be "dead on arrival" in the Senate despite President Obama's energy adviser voicing confidence in the measure.

According to internal e-mails that have been made public by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Carlin's boss told him in March that his material would not be incorporated into a broader EPA finding and ordered Carlin to stop working on the climate change issue. The draft EPA finding released in April lists six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, that the EPA says threaten public health and welfare.

An EPA official told FOXNews.com on Monday that Carlin, who is an economist -- not a scientist -- included "no original research" in his report. The official said that Carlin "has not been muzzled in the agency at all," but stressed that his report was entirely "unsolicited."

"It was something that he did on his own," the official said. "Though he was not qualified, his manager indulged him and allowed him on agency time to draft up ... a set of comments."

Despite the EPA official's remarks, Carlin told FOXNews.com on Monday that his boss, National Center for Environmental Economics Director Al McGartland, appeared to be pressured into reassigning him.

Carlin said he doesn't know whether the White House intervened to suppress his report but claimed it's clear "they would not be happy about it if they knew about it," and that McGartland seemed to be feeling pressure from somewhere up the chain of command.

Carlin said McGartland told him he had to pull him off the climate change issue.

"It was reassigning you or losing my job, and I didn't want to lose my job," Carlin said, paraphrasing what he claimed were McGartland's comments to him. "My inference (was) that he was receiving some sort of higher-level pressure."

Carlin said he personally does not think there is a need to regulate carbon dioxide, since "global temperatures are going down." He said his report expressed a "good bit of doubt" on the connection between the two.

Specifically, the report noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend over the past 11 years, that scientists do not necessarily believe that storms will become more frequent or more intense due to global warming, and that the theory that temperatures will cause Greenland ice to rapidly melt has been "greatly diminished."

Carlin, in a March 16 e-mail, argued that his comments are "valid, significant" and would be critical to the EPA finding.

McGartland, though, wrote back the next day saying he had decided not to forward his comments.

"The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision," he wrote, according to the e-mails released by CEI. "I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

He later wrote an e-mail urging Carlin to "move on to other issues and subjects."

"I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research, etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with climate," McGartland wrote.

The EPA said in a written statement that Carlin's opinions were in fact considered, and that he was not even part of the working group dealing with climate change in the first place.

"Claims that this individual's opinions were not considered or studied are entirely false. This administration and this EPA administrator are fully committed to openness, transparency and science-based decision making," the statement said. "The individual in question is not a scientist and was not part of the working group dealing with this issue. Nevertheless the document he submitted was reviewed by his peers and agency scientists, and information from that report was submitted by his manager to those responsible for developing the proposed endangerment finding. In fact, some ideas from that document are included and addressed in the endangerment finding."

The e-mail exchanges and suggestions of political interference sparked a backlash from Republicans in Congress.

Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., also wrote a letter last week to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging the agency to reopen its comment period on the finding. The EPA has since denied the request.

Citing the internal e-mails, the Republican congressmen wrote that the EPA was exhibiting an "agency culture set in a predetermined course."

"It documents at least one instance in which the public was denied access to significant scientific literature and raises substantial questions about what additional evidence may have been suppressed," they wrote.

In a written statement, Issa said the administration is "actively seeking to withhold new data in order to justify a political conclusion."

"I'm sure it was very inconvenient for the EPA to consider a study that contradicted the findings it wanted to reach," Sensenbrenner said in a statement, adding that the "repression" of Carlin's report casts doubt on the entire finding.

Carlin said he's concerned that he's seeing "science being decided at the presidential level."

"Now Mr. Obama is in effect directly or indirectly saying that CO2 causes global temperatures to rise and that we have to do something about it. ... That's normally a scientific judgment and he's in effect judging what the science says," he said. "We need to look at it harder."

The controversy is similar to one under the Bush administration -- only the administration was taking the opposite stance. In that case, scientist James Hansen claimed the administration was trying to keep him from speaking out and calling for reductions in greenhouse gases.

By Judson Berger

FOXNews.com

On Sotomayor, Objections Sustained

In a ruling that could have as much impact on the future of Sonia Sotomayor as of affirmative action, the U.S. Supreme Court released its verdict on Ricci v. DeStefano today. The 5-4 decision, which overturns a previous ruling by Sotomayor, should be a devastating blow to the President's first pick for the high court. Five justices sided with the group of 18 Connecticut firefighters, who were denied promotions because of their race.

To determine who was eligible for advancement in New Haven, the city asked its firefighters to take a test. When not enough African-Americans passed it, officials threw out the results--effectively refusing a promotion to the white and Hispanic firefighters who qualified for one. Not surprisingly, the group who was snubbed for advancement sued, arguing that they were victims of reverse discrimination.

On appeal, Judge Sotomayor ruled that the city was justified in tossing the test result. Legal experts were stunned--not only by her panel's verdict, but by how Sotomayor arrived at her conclusion. Using a tiny loophole in the 1964 Civil Rights Act, she "seized on a relatively small part of Title VII and read it in a way that swallows the anti-discrimination focus of the overwhelming bulk of the [statute]," writes Roger Clegg, President of the Center for Equal Opportunity.

The President's nominee not only turned her back on the Civil Rights Act but also on the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. To many, this case confirms Sotomayor's penchant for judicial activism. Since her appeals ruling, there has been widespread concern over how she handled the case. Even the Obama Justice Department called on the Court to reverse her panel's decision. Today, the justices did just that, writing in the majority opinion that "[f]ear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions."

In the weeks since her nomination, Sotomayor has proven to be "deeply immersed in identity politics," as Clegg calls it. A judge who distorts the law to fit her own personal prejudices has no place on the nation's highest court. I shudder to think where her politically correct tendencies would lead on matters of abortion or religious freedom. Let's just say that if this case was a test of Sotomayor's eligibility for promotion, she failed.

Cap and Trade

This last Friday, the House of Representatives passed a bill for Cap and Trade. If you don't know what Cap and Trade is, and want to know what this bill will do, here is an explaination given by Glenn Beck last Friday.

It's Friday! What are your plans? Dinner? Blockbuster movie? Hey, you could always read the 1,500-page cap-and-trade bill — that's 1,200 plus 300 in amendments.

Here's the one thing tonight: While America enjoys a Friday watching "Transformers," the country is being transformed behind our backs.

The House is sneaking in a vote on the mammoth 1,500 page Waxman-Markey climate change bill.

Why are they burying this vote on a Friday?

It could be because earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001 — despite an increase in CO2 emissions (that's an inconvenient stat), helping to swell the number of skeptical scientists to over 700 — or 13 times the scientists who wrote the supposed consensus.

It could be because more Americans are figuring out that this energy policy is just an energy tax and guaranteed to do only one thing: Raise energy prices for consumers.

But don't take my word on that claim, take it from President Obama:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA: You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Why, in the middle of a global economic crisis, would we even consider a bill that the Wall Street Journal says would be "the biggest tax in American history"?

Because it's not about saving the cute, fuzzy, man-eating polar bears, the spotted owl, the cumulus clouds or the caribou. The science is not settled on this at all — not even close.

This is about power, money and control.

But America is caught up with "Hey, did you hear? Michael Jackson is dead!"

Concentrate on things that are important, like those who are pushing this energy bill stand to gain the most from it:

• Nancy Pelosi has $50,000 to $100,000 in Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

• Rep. Edward Markey — hmm, why does that name sound familiar? — has investments between $51,000 and $115,000 in the Firsthand Technology Value Fund (which as three solar-energy manufacturers)

• Al Gore — Mr. "Inconvenient Truth" himself — his venture capital firm is heavily invested in a new software company that's making software to help companies track their carbon footprint. He, and companies like his, will make a fortune.

Not only will this bill make politicians rich, it will increase their power as well. The government will control what you can and cannot do.

Want an SUV? Oh, sorry. Gas mileage isn't good enough.

How about incandescent light bulbs? They use too much energy.

Quarter-pounder with cheese? Meat is even more harmful than the SUV!

This bill is a gateway; it will be used as justification to regulate every industry or product the government can get their grimy little fingers on.

Politicians get rich. Government gets more power and control. Businesses just pass on the cost — so there is only one loser: you, the consumer.

The worst part is, we aren't breaking new ground here. While we're busy marching towards more socialism, the rest of the world is running away from it because they've tried it.

Australia is killing their carbon tax proposals and it's already a complete failure in Spain, where it's resulted in an 18.1 percent unemployment rate (more than double Europe's average) and they are losing 2.2 jobs per every one "green job" created.

I think The New York Times quote on the European Union's cap-and-trade program (that started in 2005) says it all: "Their plan unleashed a lobbying free-for-all that led politicians to dole out favors to various industries, undermining the environmental goals. Four years later, it is becoming clear that system has so far produced little noticeable benefit to the climate, but generated a multi-billion dollar windfall for some of the continent's biggest polluters."

Enjoying Every Moment of Summer

Forward: I first want to apologize for not updating my blog for a long time.

Over this Summer I have been able to spend one of my days off from work, Mondays, to go visit Tahsha and her family. Yesterday and the Previous Monday I have been having great fun in the enjoyment of summer weather. Over the last couple months it has been raining a lot, more than average here in Utah. Thus, delaying perfect summer weather, sun and very warm temperatures.

Last Monday, I took Tahsha on a special date. The week before last Monday, I went to Downata, Hot Springs, (where Tahsha works) to visit Tahsha and play with her younger siblings. After that day, I happen to forget my Cardinals Baseball Cap at the hot springs. Instead of Tahsha telling me she will give it to me when I return the following Monday, she gave me a challenge I would have to accomplish in order to retrieve my hat back. The challenge was to take her on a wonderful evening date. Plus this date had to be something we haven't down before. I greatly excepted the challenge, for one, I would want to have my Cardinals Hat back, and most importantly, I loved the idea of trying something new.

As the week went by, there was a few ideas that circled around in my head, but never got to a final decision. Later in the week, I was texting Tahsha, as I usually do as I check on here during work, she asked me if I wanted any help on ideas. I was happily willing to receive her ideas. Of the ideas she gave me, I came to a final decision. When that Monday arrived, I got up that day, latter in the afternoon, and after finishing Nana's Daily tasks, I left to Malad. I arrived at her parents house, and her younger siblings were very exited to see me, thinking I was taking them swimming to the hot springs again. I then told them I was actually taking Tahsha out on a date, just for us two. They were disappointed, but got over it. After I got Tahsha in the car, I told her my plan and we began the date. I took her to a little lake, call the twin lakes, which is located exactly east of Malad, over the mountains, near a small town named Clifton.

I previously viewed the directions to the lake on google maps before I left that day. On a side note, I am generally good when it comes to visualizing and remembering directions when I see it on a map. As we got to Clifton, I knew the lake was just east of Clifton. As I was driving through the town I was looking for a sign that might lead us to the road that will lead us to the lake. Well, we ended up going several miles past Clifton, and I was constantly looking east, trying to find the lake, but was unsuccessful. I eventually realized it was very possible I passed the road to the lake. We than made a U-turn, and headed back to Clifton.

Once we got to Clifton, I noticed some body of water to the east. Speaking out, I knew there had to be a road to that body of water. We eventually found a road, which we happen to miss the first run through. Once on that road, and making our way to the lake, we happen to miss another road to the lake. When I visualized the direction to the lake, I just remembered the general direction. I guess I should had printed the road map. The good part is we could had been more lost than we appeared to be.

Once we got the right road, we finally made it to the lake. It was a very pretty small lake, surrounded by hill and mountain sides. They had a payment fee for entering the lake area. It was privately own. I payed the fee in a envelope that you put in a slot right by the entrance. We drove around the lake, looking for the perfect spot to park and have our picnic. We eventually got to the other side of the lake, and realizing we got to the end of the road. We than turned around and headed back. Not that far from there we found a camp ground spot right by the lake front, and unanimously, we felt it was a good spot.

There I started a fire in order to cook some hot dogs. I had prepared hot dogs, potato salad, and blue corn chips for dinner. It was a wonderful evening, as we roasted our hot dogs, we looked out at the amazing landscape of the mountains, the lake, and the blue sky. After dinner, we went into the water to get our feet wet. The water was pretty cold, but it felt very nice with the warm temperature outside. After we cooled our feet, we sat down on a nice edge side, cuddled up, and just enjoyed the moment together. Soon after, we started to roast some marshmallows for making smores. After the smores we stayed there to enjoy a wonderful sunset. I thought I did pretty good to make it personal and romantic, and I think Tahsha agrees. Soon after the sun setted over the mountains, we headed back to her parents house, ended the night watching a movie with her family. Overall, this was a great time for both of us to feel free from our work, she getting away from her siblings, myself a break from Nana, and most importantly to spend quality time together. :-)