Archives for the month of: September, 2015


I have immense respect for Dr. Ben Carson.

I note the information is a few years old. Still, holding young-earth views is ridiculous and significant. It shows ability to think wrong in big ways.

The good vicker from Great Britain has written an excellent summary of what must have influenced Dr. Carson. He points out well that YEC views are a new thing. Nothing traditional or orthodox about pretending earth is younger than history.

Peddling and Scaling God and Darwin

SH16DARWIN2

Caution Creationists3

Much has been made of Ben Carson’s comment that Satan guided Charles Darwin to accept evolution. This comes from a lecture for the Seventh Day Adventists in 2011 which you will find embedded in this article.http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/09/ben-carson-says-charles-darwin-created-the-theory-of-evolution-under-the-influence-of-satan/

To claim that Satan led dear Darwin astray is pretty face-palming for a potential President of our former colonies the United States. However other candidates hold similar views including Mike Huckabee, a southern Baptist minister.

Carson is a member of the Seventh Day Adventist Church which is one of the many millennial groups which came into being in the 19th century. Most of their beliefs are typical of conservative evangelicals /fundamentalists but they are several additions, which are not optional bolt-on extras.

These are that one must believe in a 6-day creation of the earth some 6000 years ago as this is the direct conclusion of believing the Fourth Commandments means that you must…

View original post 4,119 more words

Advertisements


Sauce for the goose…

Watts Up With That?

Josh writes: Volkswagen has been found cheating on US emissions tests, but with the Green Blob fiddling everything from Renewables to Global Temperatures, it’s no wonder they thought this was ok. Some like Stephen Glover at the UK’s Daily Mail blame green zealots directly.

Herbie_scr

Cartoons by Josh

View original post

Watts Up With That?

Guest Opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

The public just doesn't seem to be afraid of the Global Warming scare tactics The public just doesn’t seem to be afraid of the Global Warming scare tactics

Promoters of ‘official’ climate, which is defined as the works of the UN IPCC, are desperate. Twenty of them, including Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) members like Kevin Trenberth, asked the Obama administration to file Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) charges against climate deniers. All but two of the twenty are at Universities, and the two are career bureaucrats associated with the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). They all live off the public purse, but somehow in the weird world of climate science that is untainted money. The RICO charge is ad hominem, not about the science. If Virtually all the research funding for global warming comes from government and goes to those supporting the unproven hypothesis. There is no comparison between the amounts of government…

View original post 1,158 more words


It is shameful to call for criminal prosecution (persecution) of those who disagree with you.

Big Picture News, Informed Analysis

20 American academics think unorthodox climate views should be subjected to an organized crime investigation.

tg_police4_

Alternative climate perspectives are apparently so intimidating, distressing, and frightening that some people want police to get involved. Yesterday, climate scientist Judith Curryobjected strenuously to a 2-week-old letter sent to US President Obama and US Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

Signed by 20 academics, it calls for an investigation under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). When it became law back in 1970, RICO was intended to help authorities convict Mafia leaders of murders they’d ordered but hadn’t personally committed. Those found guilty under this legislation can be sent to prison for 20 years.

A few days ago, I explained that activists frequently accuse those who express unorthodox climate views of being deliberate liars. According to this line of reasoning, skeptics aren’t sincere in their beliefs. They’re just bad people. In league…

View original post 922 more words


Nice story.

Willis waxes technical with regard to the bird-burner.

I’ll take people over birds any day, but these large solar projects only result in net harm. These huge projects harm people as well as the environment. We must stand opposed.

Watts Up With That?

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

“Where the Walker runs down to the Carson Valley plains,
There lived a maiden, Darcy Farrow was her name.
The daughter of old Dundee and a fair one was she,
The sweetest flower that bloomed on the range.”

Traveling often reminds me how many places I know only through songs. I’ve made a (poor) living as a musician at various times in the past, and that’s a few lines from a song by Ian and Sylvia that I’ve sung many times. But it wasn’t until today that I’d ever seen either the Walker River or the Carson Valley. They are both lovely … at least in the late summer. I’m not making any claims about what it’s like during the winter, but then I’m a tropical boy, so what do I know.

When you come south from Lake Tahoe, you come first to Topaz Lake…

View original post 1,388 more words

It seems long ago now, but the tragedy is still painful.

Pain and suffering are simply a part of life, but it is so sad, so horrific, so evil, when someone deliberately imposes pain, suffering, and terror on others.

Let us move forward remembering:

You know what is right, because God has shown it to you. Do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly.

http://biblehub.com/micah/6-8.htm

Forgive and walk in love. Trust God, and never forget.


Hear, hear!

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Ari Halperin

As WUWT readers have probably noticed, using Google or other general search engines to find reliable information on anything related to climate change has become almost impossible. The search results are dominated by alarmist sites and blogs, while dissenting voices are simply drowned out.

The main reason for this imbalance is simple: a huge amount of money is pumped into alarmist research and propaganda by the US and other Western governments. Tens of billions of dollars in research grants, state mandates and loan guarantees to “clean energy” companies, substantial percentage of universities’ budgets, direct government grants to environmental NGOs, and tax deductions for “charitable” donations feed this frenzy. Certain pension funds also explore “noble ways to lose money“ (of their members, not their directors) to benefit the cause. The NASA website became a purveyor of the alarmist stories. Large corporations, including maligned “fossil…

View original post 491 more words

A bit of a slog, but well worth the effort if you want to know. Fairly simplified and understandable. Complexities of the real world will make it harder. The batteries really are impossible in the engineering sense. We cannot get there from here. Thomas Edison took on the problem of batteries in the 1890s. He made little progress. Progress since can only be described as discouraging. The best possible batteries we have devised so far are simply inadequate.

I’m not being pessimistic when I assert solar energy will never amount to a significant portion of what we use for our societies.

We aren’t even to a half-percent in the USA.
http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/topics/encyclopedia/solar/

Understanding this:
https://www.llnl.gov/sites/default/files/2014_us_energy.png
is very important to understanding why being against fossil fuels is the same as being against people, and for suffering, enslavement, and death of our fellow man.

Pay special attention to the light-gray fractions in the graphic.

We simply must have large scale power plants generating electricity from coal and nuclear fission, and we must have liquid hydrocarbon fuel. The only practical source of hydrocarbon fuel so far is petroleum.

We cannot change the overall system until we change these underlying facts.

Solar will be with us forever (practically). We will use it. It still will never be a significant part of our overall energy use. There will always be better options. (Better means several things, but mostly cheaper and easier.)

Wind, however, is a farce. We are hurting ourselves and future generations with our daft efforts toward windmills, and we are killing birds and bats while we harm ourselves. It is hard for me to take wind seriously. There are so many problems it just isn’t worth considering. Engineers have made so many improvements, but taken together, the whole lot still amounts to net-negative. Overall energy gained from an average windmill is unlikely to exceed the energy expended making and maintaining it. Thus the enormous tax-funded incentives and subsidies. I’ll cite T. Boone Pickens as a positive example of it, putting his money where his mouth was until it hurt too bad and he lost too much money in it, and Warren Buffett as a negative example where he invests in wind energy while the tax-incentives make it profitable for him, and he sells before things turn south, leaving the hardships of wind power to less-financially savvy persons with higher ideals regarding “renewables.” Warren Buffett is a hypocrite, and a cruel one at that.

Wind blows, but windmills suck, and the wind-power political-industrial complex is playing us all for suckers.

Watts Up With That?

By: Tom D. Tamarkin & Barrie Lawson

Over the next 50 years, utility companies in the United States must replace approximately 440 Gigawatts (GW) of baseload generation capacity to provide electricity nationwide. Significant electrification of the transportation segment through electric cars and trucks can potentially quadruple the amount of needed power.

image

This paper explores the system requirements to replace this generation capacity with a photovoltaic only generation scheme. Topics include the definition of peak power demand, time of use issues, reserve power requirements, storage to provide power when there is no sunlight, and the various engineering challenges associated with managing a large area synchronous AC power grid.

This analysis considers the factors involved in dimensioning solar power generating plants. To illustrate the issues involved the example considers the case for supplying the entire electric power needs of the USA from solar energy without the use of fossil fuel, nuclear or…

View original post 3,437 more words

While the canonical view is that global warming will increase average wind speeds, other studies conclude it will fall. Of course, none of that matters to the real world. The real world will simply minimize Gibbs Free Energy, form dissipative systems [no matter how complex they need to be to maximize efficiency from the system and tools available], and the real world will run down. Of course, the windmills run down too.

Overall, winds blow but windmills suck.

We need to wise up and quit wasting effort building bird-bat blenders.

Watts Up With That?

wind-turbine[1]

The Financial Times reports that the USA is experiencing the weakest wind speeds for 40 years, which is having a dramatic impact on wind energy businesses.

According to the FT (subscription may be required);

US clean energy suffers from lack of wind

A lack of wind is making the US clean energy sector sweat, with consequences for investors from yield-hungry pensioners to Goldman Sachs.
Electricity generated by US wind farms fell 6 per cent in the first half of the year even as the nation expanded wind generation capacity by 9 per cent, Energy Information Administration records show.

The reason was some of the softest air currents in 40 years, cutting power sales from wind farms to utilities. The feeble breezes come as the White House is promoting renewable energy, including wind, as part of its Clean Power Plan to counter greenhouse gas emissions.

“We never anticipated a drop-off in…

View original post 115 more words

Worthwhile article. The science isn’t settled. Science never is.

The lead graphic and first sentence are laughably inconsistent. The graphic states that it depicts what earth will look like with 6000 millimeters of increased average sea level. Not scary by itself. Not scary at all when considering that sea level is currently measured to be rising at about 3 millimeters per year. Accordingly, a linear extrapolation gets us out 2000 years hence.

Looking around the internet for examples of old photos that can show sea level, and current photos of the same location can provide as many examples as you care to review. One cannot tell that significant change is occurring overall. We aren’t talking about flooding cities. Sooner or later coasts change. Some coastal locations will go under water, others will have the ocean shore recede. Sooner or later everywhere changes. England has locations lost to the sea, and landlocked villages that used to be on the seashore. And that is just on that small island.

Everything changes. Always has. Always will.

It is also important to note that alarmists spin the rate of sea level rise. They like to claim that the current sea level rise rate of 3 mm per year is three time more than in the recent past. First, they are comparing apples and oranges. Second, that is playing fast and loose with the known facts. It is most practical to say that the sea level rise rate has been between one and three millimeters per year for thousands of years, all of our historical past. There really is no practical way to be afraid of something continuing to happen that has, for practical purposes, always happened.

Watts Up With That?

Study suggests that global sea level is less sensitive to high atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations than previously thought.

From STANFORD’S SCHOOL OF EARTH, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Ice sheets may be more resilient than thought, say Stanford scientists

This is a map of the Earth with a 6-meter sea level rise represented in red. A new Stanford study says that the sea level rise associated with a warming world may not be as high as predicted. CREDIT NASA This is a map of the Earth with a 6-meter sea level rise represented in red. A new Stanford study says that the sea level rise associated with a warming world may not be as high as predicted. CREDIT NASA

Sea level rise poses one of the biggest threats to human systems in a globally warming world, potentially causing trillions of dollars’ worth of damages to flooded cities around the world. As surface temperatures rise, ice sheets are melting at record rates and sea levels are rising.

But there may be some good news amid the worry. Sea levels may not rise as high as assumed.

To predict sea level changes, scientists look to…

View original post 665 more words

%d bloggers like this: