Mike Rowse A voice from New Mexico


Damn history and facts keep getting in the way


America's bars and taverns are where things really get discussed, hashed out and problems solved. Our country was hatched in the bars and taverns of colonial America. As such I try to spend a fair amount of time there solving the world's problems or at least talking about how we can solve them. I overheard a conversation between some hipster types this past week in which they were quite distraught about how no one is really doing anything about global warming. I'm not sure what world they live in but I see a lot of regulations coming from the EPA alone in an attempt to stop climate change.

That little factoid being ignored by people who really care about our world, they nonetheless seemed to take great pleasure in what will happen to the rich folks living along the coasts of our world; of course the oceans will rise taking their property without recompense, which 'serves them right'. Of course the poor islanders in the Pacific or Caribbean or wherever will have to suffer but they appeared to be less concerned about them; although I was tempted to remind them of that but I didn't want to contribute to their enjoyment of the evening.

But lets look at history shall we, since that is often the most successful predictor of future events. Scientists tell us that sea levels are never constant but in doing a little research, including the checking out the climate alarmists' web sites, it appears that ocean levels are rising between 0 and 2 mm per year. Global temperatures are at worst flat and at best cooling; unless of course you make your living off being an alarmist. Snow cover and polar ice caps are as stable as they probably ever have been in Earth's history.

We know that in the most recent ice age, about 16,000 years ago, that a thick sheet of ice covered much of North America and Europe. That means there was less liquid water covering the globe. Early man and certainly many animals could walk from what is now London to Paris or from Siberia to Alaska. There would not have been a Great Barrier Reef since what is now Queensland was part of a plain and not a coast.

Then the Earth's temperature began to rise; without man's help I might point out. The glaciers melted causing ocean levels to rise. Most scientists agree the sea levels increased by about 130m or almost 500 ft. Our early ancestors were forced to move and did so without zoning laws or some nanny state to tell them it was time to get the heck out of Dodge. I'm sure they were happy to see warmer temps come with rain instead of snow.

And they rebuilt after watching what had been coastal cities being flooded and now standing under water. With warming temps came more arable land, meaning more ability to grow food that fed more people. You know what's more dangerous than warming climate temperatures? Cooling temps. If the ice age comes back that takes a lot of farm land out of production, meaning at the very least, more clearing of the forests in the Amazon to try and feed the population. What it also means is more starvation and hunger due to a lack of food. Thus more wars... we've seen the cycle before.

Despite all the hand wringing, the actions of the EPA or the U.N., much of what we know as protected species will disappear.


Let’s stick to the script despite the facts


I was reading an article in a NY area newspaper and it warned of the coming snow storm. The title used the words, "Lake Effect Snowstorm", which is the preferred term for those that believe in man caused global warming. A refresher for those of you that don't remember the term or aren't familiar with its usage. Global warming alarmists/liars, needed a term to explain why there were large snow storms hitting areas of the U.S. despite their claims that our weather was warming and it wouldn't be long before the mainland U.S. was a tropical paradise. So they came up with the lake effect snow phenomena.

Lake effect snowstorms come about because the water in the lake is at a higher than normal temperature, thus water is evaporating at a higher rate. Cold air comes in and turns that moisture into snow, but most likely only for short periods of time because the warm air will return. But nonetheless that was the environmentalists' explanation of snowstorms during periods of catastrophic warming. Never mind that there isn't a big body of water near Tucson AZ.

So now the media is portraying this huge, record breaking snow storm hitting the northeast as 'lake effect' storms. So let's take a look at the temperature of the water in the Great Lakes. It must be higher than average right? Data from NOAA and Meteorologist Mark Torregrossa from Michigan shows that current water temps on the lakes is about six degrees colder than last year and three degrees colder than average. Guess that kind of ruins the lake effect theory doesn't it? Not for the true believers of course.

Torregrossa goes on to use real science to talk about the effect the lakes has upon temperatures. "A warmer Lake Superior and Lake Michigan can really have a modifying effect on bitter cold temperatures. For example, in an early season cold outbreak, Green Bay, WI may have a temperature of 20 degrees. Traverse City, on our side of Lake Michigan may hold in the mid 30s for temperatures. I usually figure there is a 10-20 degree warming effect from Lake Michigan, and also Lake Superior. But if the lake temperatures continue at this colder pace, cold air will have an easier time moving into Michigan. So the first impact of cold water could be earlier cold temperatures in November and December."

So you're telling me that warmer water actually mitigates cold snaps, making it warmer on the eastern and southern sides of the lakes?! Historically, that is proven by factual data. So 'lake effect' snowstorms are a bunch of hooey? The reason there is so much snow and bitter cold temps is because the lakes are actually colder than historical average. Who knew?!


Wait a minute, Antarctica set a record for what?!


Researchers from the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign announced in The Cryosphere Today that sea ice in the Antarctic has reached record levels, again! The 'scientists' (because Obama said no real scientists dispute man caused global warming aka climate change) said that since 1979, when satellite measurements began, the amount of ice at the southernmost continent has been steadily increasing. There is now 2.074 million square kilometers of ice, more than has ever been recorded. This isn't just some nipping of the old record, it's 1.6 million square km higher than the previous record which was set in December of 2007.

Not to mention this is all being done while a couple of active volcanoes sitting underneath the ice cap are warming the waters surrounding the coldest place on earth. That can't be possible. Al Gore and Obama said that all of the sea ice was melting because we humans insist on having electricity and driving to our jobs in cars or trucks. We are killing polar bears because they can't find solid ice floes to walk across and get to baby seals.

I'm sure the 'real scientists' will come up with an explanation as to why the amount of ice is increasing but it's being caused by man caused global warming, err climate change. The lake snow effect for example. Either that or they'll manipulate the data to claim the ice cap is actually shrinking and the satellite cameras are just lying.




What's going on? When an avowed radical left winger starts to sound logical, there has to be a reason. Figuring it out is not always easy but maybe there is some money in the deal. And this isn't just some left leaning activist, this is one of the most radical left wing activists we've seen, Patrick Moore. Moore is a co-founder of Greenpeace. They've been known to be pretty left wing and radical in their tactics to protect the environment.

On Tuesday Moore was allowed to testify in front of a Senate committee about global warming. What he said has to have the liberals, especially Al Gore, squirming in their leather lined Lear jets. Moore said the claim that burning fossil fuels is driving global warming over the past century lacks scientific evidence. Blasphemer! He added that the Earth is in an unusually cold period and could actually benefit from some warming but we can't control it.

"There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth's atmosphere over the past 100 years. Today, we live in an unusually cold period in the history of life on Earth and there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species. It is important to recognize, in the face of dire predictions about a 2 degrees Celsius rise in global average temperatures, that humans are a tropical species. We evolved at the equator in a climate where freezing weather did not exist. The only reasons we can survive in these cold climates are fire, clothing and housing."

Statistics bear out Moore's point that freezing temps kill more people than hotter temperatures. From 1999 to 2010, a total of 4563 people died from heat related conditions while 7778 died from cold conditions. In Britain alone, an estimated 4.5 million families face "fuel poverty" conditions because of high energy prices, which in part are contributed to by regulations meant to deal with man caused global warming.

Moore goes on to make a point we've discussed repeatedly in our entries about man caused global warming; at multiple times in the past we have had higher concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere than we have today yet we've had ice ages at times when the CO2 level was 10 times greater. To argue that man made CO2 is the cause of global warming is contradictory to scientific evidence and thus is a red herring. He appears to be advocating for the repeal of some regulations designed to combat global warming to make energy cheaper especially for poorer families.

To be fair, Moore left Greenpeace when the group became too radical in their tactics, but to have someone who is clearly on the left side of the aisle in environmental issues come out and clearly state a contrary position will no doubt make him a target for the left. He'll be excoriated and could even be audited by the IRS given President Obama's claim in his SOTU speech that global warming is a fact. Forget messing with Mother Nature, don't leave the left's reservation, you'll be ostracized quicker than one of Warren Jeff's ex-wives.


Yeah, our Earth is fragile…


As Montana and much of the country experiences record cold temperatures, the man caused global warming crowd is blaming you and I for the record cold; remember, there's the 'lake snow effect' and things like that causing cold temperatures because man is putting too much CO2 and other green house gases into the atmosphere. We are constantly told how fragile our planet is; catchy phrases such as "save the Earth, it's the only home we have" inundate the airwaves and other media, especially around Earth Day. But really how fragile is our Earth?

Let's take a look at that penultimate teacher, history to find out. What has our planet endured in it's lifetime and still come through with flying colors? How about the meteor strike that is supposed to have killed the dinosaurs? The resulting explosion leveled the rain forests in what we now call the Amazon. Guess those biomes made a pretty good comeback. Not to mention the resulting dust and debris cloud enveloping the Earth in darkness for several months killing almost all plant and mammal life.

The 1883 eruption of the Krakatoa volcano had the force of 13,300 15 kiloton atomic bombs; you know the one that destroyed Hiroshima in 1945. The 1815 eruption of Tambora, widely believed to be the largest volcanic eruption in recorded history, created the "year without summer". Crop failures, livestock death and the worst famine of the 19th century resulted. The A.D. 535 Krakatoa eruption blocked out the sun for 18 months. Scientists, real ones, not fake CRU alarmists, have shown that just three volcanic eruptions, Indonesia 1883/Alaska 1912/Iceland 1947, have spewed more carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere than all of mankind's activities in our entire history. But the Earth has bounced back quite nicely thank you very much.

Let's talk about pollution. Remember acid rain and the river in Ohio that burned? Yes, man has done some stupid things when getting rid of waste products but we've made changes and the Earth has bounced back like a champ. Smog enveloped London and many other cities around the world when coal or fuel oil was used for heating, not to mention the smoke put out by factories. But look at those cities today, the air is actually breathable. With the exception of some cities in China or Brazil or other countries that have been exempted from pollution control measures because the cost would ruin their emerging economies. Explain that one without being hypocritical. I guess every country should get the experience of ruining their rivers before having to clean them.

The Earth has recovered from numerous disasters, including mega disasters. Nature nor God nor man has been able to destroy the third rock from the sun. Clearly, I'm not saying let's go back to our old polluting ways, but let's be realist about the regulations we implement and their true 'benefits' and costs. Let's also be realistic about just how resilient our planet really is...


Damn the facts, full speed ahead


On Friday last week Obama signed another decree, err executive order, instructing federal agencies to work with state and local governments to boost preparations for the impact of global warming. This continues Obama's war on industries he doesn't like, such as coal mining and coal generated electricity. His rules have already shuttered 150 coal burning plants or set in motion their demise, which equals 1/6 of America's electrical output.

He said global warming has already had a negative effect on communities and public health across the nation and directed those constructing infrastructure projects to take into consideration future climate change conditions which have already resulted in unnecessarily higher price tags for those projects. But once again, he's ignoring the science, the facts, and plowing forward because he wants to change the world.

Environmentalist Lawrence Solomon wrote recently, "Now an increasing number of scientists are swinging back to the thinking of the 1960s and 1970s. The global cooling hypothesis may have been right after all, they say Earth may be entering a new Little Ice Age." Scientific data, not theory, shows that solar activity is decreasing at the fastest rate as anytime in the last 10,000 years.

Columbia University's George Kukla, a climate specialist, warned in 1972 that we would see a period of warming through the 80s and maybe into the 90s followed by another little ice age. At the time his research indicated there was always a period of warming just prior to the beginning of an ice age. Turns out that is what is happening as we saw 15-17 years of warming and are now in the midst of over a decade of cooling global temperatures.

Scientists are also proving a link between solar activity and the temperature of the Earth. From the late 50s to the mid 90s there was an increase in solar activity which resulted in the 15-17 years of warming; now solar activity is slowing rapidly and we are seeing a cooling.

Dr. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology wrote that 2002 is "scientifically interesting because it coincides with the 'climate shift' of roughly 2001-2. This shift and subsequent slight cooling trend provides a rationale for inferring a slight cooling trend over the next decade or so, rather than a flat trend from the 15 (year) pause."

Professor Cliff Ollier of the School of Earth and Environmental Studies at the university of Western Australia presented a study that posited the sun was a major controller of the climate. "There is a very good correlation of sunspots and climate. Solar cycles provide a basis for prediction. Solar Cycle 24 has started and we can expect serious cooling. Many think that political decisions are based on scientific models but what politicians get are projections based on computer models." Computer models using faulty data as shown by the CRU emails.

The simple fact is when Obama says his moves are based on scientific consensus and data, he is 100% wrong. The science is not settled and the predictions of catastrophic climate change, i.e. global warming, have not come true and are being shown to have been wrong. Yet he and others plow forward with their plans for change costing us billions of dollars we don't have and don't need to spend.


What global warming?


The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration recently released its 'State of the Climate 2012' report claiming that "worldwide, 2012 was among the 10 warmest years on record." What the authors of the report fail to mention is that at least twofold; the data upon which they relied to make that claim is faulty at best due to, as we've pointed out before, the inconsistent placement of equipment used to record temperatures and 2012 was also one of the coolest since the turn of the century further confirming a cooling trend.

Maybe it's because there are multiple authors of the report and no one really reads the entire thing before it is published, but the NOAA notes that in 2012 "the Arctic continues to warm" with "sea ice reaching record lows." But the report also states that Antarctic sea ice "reached a record high of 7.51 million square miles" as measured on September 26, 2012. Now if the Earth's atmosphere is warming on a global scale, how is that possible? Their own data also shows that there has been a significant slowdown in the rate of Arctic ice melting with temps at the North Pole well below normal for this time of year. In fact the summer in the Arctic was the shortest on record in 2013; it's being called the coldest summer ever recorded in the Arctic.

Let's keep going with the NOAA's own data refuting their claims about global warming; they reported that the "average lower strastospheric temperature, about six to ten miles above the Earth's surface, for 2012 was record or near record cold, depending on the dataset" even while concentrations of greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide continued to increase. So the climate models claiming greenhouse gases like CO2 would warm the Earth if we didn't slow or eliminate their amounts are dead wrong yet despite the evidence that the Earth has stopped warming and is cooling, they claim we are still headed for disaster. No, there's no ulterior motive (money) involved here...


You just can’t force it…


Nanny Bloomberg is pushing the liberal agenda more than anyone right now but he is suffering a setback as the Metropolitan Transit Agency is giving up on hybrid transportation. Mayor Bloomberg has jumped on every leftist wacko idea from banning foods to styrofoam containers; banned people from playing headphones too loud; jumped on global warming causes and went hybrid in the bus system as quickly as anyone; all of his moves without due consideration to consequences.

But the MTA is now jumping off the hybrid buses, literally. The city hasn't bought a new hybrid bus in three years and is now retrofitting the hybrids they do have with regular diesel engines. 389 hybrid electrical buses will be retrofitted this year alone. The hybrid engines are failing, burning out and are so expensive to replace that it's far cheaper to stick a diesel engine in and run it for several years before catching up to the cost of hybrid engines. Now the diesel engines are so fuel efficient that they are at least as efficient as the hybrids so the savings in fuel is no longer a chief selling point.

It just proves once again that you can't force solutions, doesn't matter if the problem is real or not, if technology hasn't caught up with us, then it's not going to work the way the liberals plan.


Oh the irony


One of the big arguments Al Gore and the global warming alarmists have used to try and persuade us to take up their cause is that major destructive storms, such as hurricanes and tornados will increase as the Earth's temperature rises. We were told that Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina would be child's play with more category 5 storms becoming the norm and not the exception. That of course has proven to be false as the dire predictions were way off. Yet, Obama takes off on a grand attempt to fundamentally change how we live and not in a good way. However a new study by scientists at the Met Office Hadley Center in the U.K. suggests stricter pollution controls will actually lead to more storms rather than prevent them.

The article was published in the journal Nature Geoscience and essentially breaks down to this: man made aerosols & green house gasses interact with natural particulate dust and volcanic debris in the atmosphere to create longer lasting low level clouds over the ocean. The clouds keep the water temperature cooler and therefore less likely to create hurricanes. Nick Dunstone, the lead author, said that pollution controls that reduce the aerosols specifically will produce "record numbers of tropical storms for the next decade or two."

The team studied data over the last 100 years and also found that during economic boom times there was more aerosol released into the atmosphere by man thus leading to fewer hurricanes and tropical storms. Conversely as economies slowed into recession there was less economic activity thus fewer green house gasses released into the atmosphere and storm activity increased. The pattern was seen with fewer hurricanes in the 1960s through the 1990s versus higher numbers of storms between the 1930s and 1950s. Then in 1995, when aerosol bans went into effect storm activity increased dramatically. There were also 28 storms reported in 2008, when the current recession took full effect and 19 every year since then.

So if you follow the logical conclusion our use of aerosols and creation of green house gases is actually helping the climate and saving lives. People who want to ban the gases and like Obama reduce emissions are actually killing people and destroying the homes and lives. If reducing the emissions creates mores storms which are more intense then people are going to die and have their lives ruined. Oh the irony will be lost on them; I'm sure Obama and Gore will call these folks at the Center members of the "Flat Earth Society" and ridicule their data...


Say goodbye to our economy

Obama common sense

Obama's climate change speech continues his pattern of ignoring the facts and doing what he wants, including bypassing Congress and telling his agencies to enact policies that will accomplish his goals even when Congress has rejected his plans specifically. Glorious Leader said the science is settled, all of the questions put to rest and now it's just a matter of what are we doing to do about it. Well that is an absolute bald faced lie and I am sure he knows it. The scientific community doesn't agree that global warming exists in the first place and then there is huge disagreement on what caused global warming if it does exist. The people supporting the President have lied about the data, made up facts; all of it documented in their own emails and correspondence. The data shows that the Earth has been in a cooling phase for a decade or more. There is significant evidence that man is not causing any global warming because one volcano puts more so called greenhouse gasses in the air in one day than the U.S. does in a year.

But damn the torpedos, Obama is going ahead anyway, literally declaring war on coal and attacking other fossil fuels. He is going to order the EPA to limit carbon dioxide emissions from the nation's power plants. Let's see how much your electric bill raises because of those moves. He is going to nix the Keystone Pipeline based upon some notion that the oil pumped through it will significantly contribute to carbon pollution. Then he's going to open up federal lands to green energy projects, ones that are inefficient and costly so we can power 6 million homes in the next 6 years. Adding higher fuel standards for heavy duty vehicles; you know like those big trucks that bring you your food, clothing and every other product you need or want. Then setting some arbitrary standard for the federal government to consume 20% of its power from renewable energy sources in the next seven years.

Here's the simple fact; global warming doesn't exist as a problem that man can solve, period, end of story. If green energy technologies were so great, then the private market would be bringing those projects to the market and making bank off of them. Simply, the technology has not caught up with the desire to provide inexpensive, efficient sources of power and it doesn't matter how much Obama forces the issue, it's not going to happen overnight. The costs of meeting his goals will add to the cost of living of everyday Americans and will further push our economy to the back of the pack as China, Russia, Brazil and others develop our sources of oil, cheap energy and use that to drive their economies forward.

His actions and statements further show it's all about him and the power he wants to wield. He is lecturing us on why we are bad people and why we need the government, no an all powerful messiah, to take control and make our world a better place because we can't do it. Obama says he wants national discourse on a variety of issues but when it comes time to debate, he shuts down and does what he wants anyway. To make the statements he's making about climate change, which might be happening as a normal course of history, shows a supreme arrogance that has been unmatched in our lifetimes. Get ready for a serious step backwards in our economy if WE don't act; we have to force our elected officials to push back and stop the massive power grab, the regulations and the job killing policies this pretender is forcing upon us. If WE the citizens don't demand action from our elected representatives then vote them out if they fail, it's our fault and we deserve what we get.

Oh and let's not forget that this is going to take much of the focus off of the invasion of privacy, the lying and all the other scandals plaguing the most un-transparent, un-ethical administration in history. That is all part of his plan.