American Elephants


What Progressives Should Know About Trump Voters by The Elephant's Child

Victor Davis Hanson has a particularly interesting column today at CNN, of all places.  It is titled “What progressives should know about Trump Voters.” CNN may just be the perfect place for that.

1. Voters appreciate that the economy is currently experiencing near record-low peacetime unemployment, record-low minority unemployment, and virtual 3% annualized GDP growth. Interest and inflation rates remain low. Workers’ wages increased after years of stagnation. The US is now the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas. And gasoline prices remain affordable. The President continues to redress asymmetrical trade with China, as well as with former NAFTA partners and Europe. He jawbones companies to curb offshoring and outsourcing. The current economic recovery and low consumer prices have uplifted millions of middle-class Americans who appreciate the upswing.

2. Trump does not exist in a vacuum. Many supporters turned off by some of his antics are still far more appalled by an emerging radical neo-socialist Democratic agenda. If the alternative to Trump is a disturbing tolerance among some Democrats for anti-Semitism, the Green New Deal, reparations, a permissive approach to abortion even very late in pregnancy, a wealth tax, a 70-90% top income tax rate, the abolition of ICE, open borders, and Medicare for all, Trump’s record between 2017-20 will seem moderate and preferable. Progressives do not fully appreciate how the hysterics and media coverage of the Kavanaugh hearings, the Covington teenagers and the Jussie Smollett psychodrama turned off half the country. Such incidents and their reportage confirmed suspicions of cultural bias, media distortions, and an absence of fair play and reciprocity.

Do read the whole thing. You’ll be glad you did. Ignore CNN’s cute inserts.



The “Green New Deal” Is a Pack of Lies by The Elephant's Child

Well, the Justice Democrats cooked up quite a conflagration over a weekend with their “Green New Deal”. It got more attention than it deserved, simply because some people belie-e-e-ved, and it frightened the sensible folks. It would, if imposed, destroy the country. Nothing about it would work, but it was cleverly devised so that those who were ill-informed would think it possible, and of course, most people don’t keep up with matters like the efficiency of wind turbines and solar cells. Perhaps even some of your neighbors get some rebates from the power company for the energy they contribute to the grid.

Solar cells do work a little bit, when the sun is shining brightly in a cloudless sky, which, unfortunately, isn’t all that often. The major greenhouse gas is not carbon dioxide, but water vapor in the form of clouds. Did you ever lie on your back on the lawn when you were a kid, and watch the clouds moving across the sky? The clouds here were beautiful here one day last week, big puffy cumulus with occasional holes where the blue sky in the background shone through. The point is, most of the time there are clouds, always moving. Some days it is just clouds, and of course, since this is the Seattle area, some days it rains. A day with a clear blue sky is rare. So where do you get your energy in a cloudy stretch of days? Solar energy requires 24/7 backup from conventional energy sources like fossil fuels,or hydropower. There are hydropower dams in all of our major rivers, and there’s not much of anywhere to put new dams. Wind turbines work when the wind blows at the correct speed, but wind doesn’t do that all the time or even regularly. The idea that you can power America with wind turbines and solar cells is far beyond stupid, and quite impossible. You will find echos in today’s reporting of IPPC General Secretary Christiana Figueres’ statement that the goal of the climate movement was not to change the environment but to end capitalism.  That’s what they’re after.

Canadian Climate Scientist Tim Ball has an excellent history of the climate written up at Anthony Watt’s wattsupwiththat blog:

Most people were taken in by the false story of human-caused global warming. We can include all the students participating in the classroom walkout to demand governments stop climate change, organized by 16-year-old Greta Thunberg. Her goal is to keep global temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Apparently, she has no idea that the temperature was near or above that level for most of the last 10,000-years in a period known as the Holocene Optimum.

They are taken in by the false claim that a minute amount of human-produced CO2 is effectively controlling the entire atmospheric system since 1950 and causing environmental collapse through global warming. They don’t know that there is an upper limit to the amount that CO2 can increase temperature. They don’t know that the average level of CO2 over the last 250 million years is 1200 ppm. They don’t know that every projection of temperature by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 1990 was wrong. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, how did so few, fool so many, to such an extent, for so long?

Similar situations occur throughout history of people fooling the world, although this is undoubtedly the largest in terms of its acceptance, impact, and cost. It is tempting to point the finger at the IPCC, but the speed with which the story took hold, spread, and deceived so many people requires better explanation. It likely won’t stop it occurring in the future because it speaks to the nature of human beings and our inordinate and pandemic fear that the sky might fall. However, we might stop the current insanity.

Do read the whole thing. We are in a dangerous time, and we need a well-informed public.



The Last Children’s Crusade Was in 1212. Didn’t Turn Out Well. by The Elephant's Child

wind-farm_2503696b-e1552710018609.jpg

According to the people who actually measure the temperature of the planet with satellite and weather balloon for NASA, over the last 40 years the earth has warmed approximately 0.25° Celsius or 2.2° Fahrenheit. According to Anthony Watts, a 2° F. warming is roughly equivalent to the warming seen most spring days between 10 a.m. and noon.

So naturally the kids have been skipping school today to demonstrate and march to save them from the catastrophic warming of the earth because we  are all going to die in 12 years if we don’t eliminate fossil fuels and save the planet with wind turbines and solar cells. Never mind the annoying fact that the wind does not blow all the time, sometimes not for days, and wind turbines shut down completely when it gets cold. The sun, even the kids might have noticed, sinks beneath the horizon every night.  And there are clouds, often lots of clouds. The big solar arrays just don’t produce enough electricity to run much of anything. The European nations that got all excited about solar have pretty much backed off because it doesn’t work.

Have you heard of “The sustainability agenda” This is from a report from the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) in Britain.

The impetus to put the environment and sustainable development at the centre of the education agenda can be traced back to the early 1970s. In these early days of the modern environmental movement, the UN’s Stockholm Conference of 1972 concluded that environmental education was ‘essential in order to broaden the basis for…enlightened opinion and responsible conduct’. By1976, such ideas had taken hold,and an international conference on
environmental education was held in Belgrade to plan the way forward. At its conclusion, the Belgrade Charter was issued, stating that the aim of environmental education was the development of a world population that was educated about the environment, had ‘strong feelings of concern for the environment and the motivation for actively participating in its protection and improvement’.

Children as political tools

This revolution in the purpose of education appears to be not only concerned with changing the way children think but also about changing the behaviour of adults, using their children as a lever. The chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri has suggested that a focus on children is the top priority for bringing about societal change, and that by ‘sensitising’ children to climate change, it will be possible to get them to ‘shame adults into taking the right steps’.Pachauri’s ideas are echoed in UNICEF’s manual on climate change education, which, it is claimed, is about helping children to become ‘agents of change’. The EU, meanwhile, has funded schemes aimed at promoting the standard, narrow ideas about climate change and its causes in schools. Their explicit wish is to ‘link students in both primary and secondary schools across Europe to discuss, engage and commit to undertake actions to limit the change in climate.’

The whole report can be found here. It is British, but the general push is quite international as you may have noticed in the “Green New Deal.” Long, but interesting.



The “Green New Deal” is, Unfortunately, Quite Impossible by The Elephant's Child

One might think that before you attempt to Re-Organize the Whole Country on wisps and idle thoughts in your first weeks in Congress, you might have consulted someone, (anyone?) who knows something about energy, in order to keep from embarrassing yourself and all the other newbies who have decided to run for president, and just signed right on. You see, you do not know what you are talking about. Yes, this informative video comes from the energy industry, but who do you suppose knows enough about energy to explain the facts?

These are the first two videos in  a projected series of six videos explaining the realities of energy, from the  Clear Energy Alliance.  There’s a  lot more that we need to know, like the wonders and  usefulness of nuclear power. What about Fukushima? Don’t we have to worry about something like that? That’s why I recommend watching for the rest of the series to come.

(h/t: Powerline)



The Planet Has Been Warming and Cooling for Millions and Millions of Years by The Elephant's Child

globalwarming-ed01

 

RECENT EARTH CLIMATE HISTORY

600 TO 200 B.C.:Unnamed cold period that preceded the Roman Warming.
200 B.C.to about A.D.600:Roman Warming.
600 to 900:Dark Ages cold period.
900 to 1300:Medieval Warming or Little Climate Optimum.
1300 to 1850:Little Ice Age (two-stage)

MODERN CLIMATE HISTORY

1850 to 1940:Warming, especially between 1920 and 1940.
1940 to 1975:Cooling Trend.
1976 to 1978:Sudden Warming Spurt
1979 to present:large disparity between surface thermometers, which show a fairly strong warming, and the independent temperature readings of satellites and weather balloons, which show little warming trend.

I don’t know in what form Congressperson Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Governor Inslee received the information that Climate Change was suddenly, after millions and millions of years, becoming an existential threat to life on earth, and with all sorts of scientists studying the problem, that they were personally called upon to notify humanity that we have to do something right now or we are all doomed.

Neither of these two politicians have scientific degrees, nor do they back up their incipient terror with incontrovertible evidence from any scientist of repute. So with no confirmation of any kind, it’s left up to us ordinary citizens, with long experience with politicians trying to make themselves seem important, to call b.s. on the whole thing.

The climate has been warming and cooling long before history recorded any temperatures, but scientists have devised ways of getting at least an inkling of what has gone on in the big ages of the past. I am merely a lay person with no scientific expertise, so I look things up in books at home or from the library. If I don’t understand what I am reading, I study up a little more. I learned  long time ago that it was kind of embarrassing to shoot off one’s mouth and not know what you are talking about.

The above timeline is from a 2007 book called Unstoppable Global Warming



The State of the Polar Bear, 2018 by The Elephant's Child

The State of the Polar Bear report was published on the 27th by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. It confirms that polar bears are continuing to thrive, in spite of recent reductions in sea ice levels. This finding contradicts the claims by environmentalists and some scientists that decreased levels of sea ice would wipe out declining bear populations.

The report’s author, Dr. Susan Crockford, is a world renowned expert on polar bears. She says there is now very little evidence to support the idea that the  polar bear is threatened with extinction because of climate change.

“We now know that polar bears are very resourceful creatures. They have made it through warm periods in the past and they seem to be taking the current warming in their stride too”. 

It appears now that it is the residents of the Arctic Circle who have the most to worry about. Increasing numbers of bears all year around, have meant reports of people being threatened, and even mauled, particularly from Nunavut in the far North of Canada.

Dr, Crockford explains:

The people of Nunavut are not seeing starving, desperate bears – quite the opposite. Yet polar bear specialists are saying these bears are causing problems because they don’t have enough sea ice to feed properly. The facts on the ground make their claims look silly, including the abundance of fat bears. Residents are pushing their government for a management policy that makes protection of human life the priority.”

Polar bear numbers have continued to increase slightly since 2005, although sea ice levels have been at a low level.  The predicted decline in polar bear numbers just did not happen.

  • • Despite marked declines in summer sea ice, Chukchi Sea polar bears continue to thrive: reports from the first population-size estimate for the region, performed in 2016, show bears in the region are abundant (almost 3000 individuals), healthy and reproducing well.
  • National Geographic received such a profound backlash from its widely viewed ‘this is what climate change looks like ’ starving polar bear video, released in late 2017, that in 2018 it made a formal public apology for spreading misinformation
  • .• In Canada, where perhaps two-thirds of the world’s polar bears live, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife (COSEWIC) decided in 2018 to continue to list the polar bear as a species of ‘Special concern’ rather than upgrade to ‘Threatened.’
  • • Polar bear attacks made headlines in 2018: two fatal attacks in Nunavut, Canada and a narrowly averted death-by-mauling in northern Svalbard caught the world by surprise. Despite the folks parading around in polar bear costumes at climate marches, we need to remember that the bears are wild animals and dangerous.

The report is available here.



Yoo Hoo! New Congressperson Ocasio-Cortez! by The Elephant's Child

Windmills_840x480

“Polar Vortex” New term for many people. I did a  brief search, and all the major media sources were talking about the “polar vortex.” NBC News “2019 polar vortex. Here’s how the brutal cold impacted the U.S.” HuffPost “How to Help Homeless People Amid the Freezing Cold Polar Vortex” Washington Post “Making sense of the polar vortex and record cold on a feverish planet” Bing.com/ “Videos of Polar Vortex” where, how long, how cold.  There’s lots more, but you get the idea.

Back in the nation’s capitol, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was making speeches about the horrors of global warming, and how we were all going to die in just 15 years, or was it 12? Others mentioned an estimated $94 trillion cost, and Kamala Harris said we’d just have to pay it, which may have eliminated her as a candidate. Voters are interested in the subject of climate change only as long as it doesn’t cost them anything, according to the large polling companies, like Rasmussen. Seems to be  bit of a disconnect here. Disastrous warming and Polar Vortex don’t exactly go together. But then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s solution of vastly more wind turbines doesn’t work either, because it would take an acreage the size of the state of California to produce enough wind to power the United States.

To top that off, we just learned that “Wind Didn’t Work During Polar Vortex“– from the Midcontinent Independent Systems Operator (MISO) who just released a report stating the wind didn’t work during the polar vortex that swept Minnesota on January 29 and 30. Electricity output from wind plummeted due to low wind speeds and because it was “too cold” for the wind turbines to operate.”

Well, AOC.  Back to the drawing board.  How about some nice modern nuclear reactors instead?




%d bloggers like this: