American Elephants


Wind Turbines Do Have a Use Even When There’s No Wind by The Elephant's Child

I have written many times about the problem with wind turbines is the simple fact that wind does not blow all the time. It is too intermittent to be successful as a source of significant power.  I have learned that wind turbines are useful— even when the wind does not blow. Who knew?

This was a tweet from someone in Germany, but I lost it and cannot find his name. So thank you, I apologize for not adding your name.

Correction: It was a tweet from Damien Ernst in Liege, Belgium, who is a professor at the University of Liege. Wonderful picture, great sense of humor.



Does Alphabet/Google Want Conservatives’ Business? Well, No, No They Don’t. by The Elephant's Child

Justin Danhof of the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Free Enterprise Project challenges executives of Alphabet – Google’s parent company – about the company’s tolerance of political diversity. Does a company that routinely and publicly supports liberal causes take into account its conservative employees, investors and consumers?

Well, no, no they don’t.The smartest men in the universe, who hire only the most intelligent people publicly flunk science, flunk diversity (Not interested in diversity of ideas) flunk public relations, and have no problem with insulting nearly half the people in the United States,and the majority of the Congress and the state houses, and are so oblivious that they don’t even know that their positions are hard left, and don’t realize that they are suggesting that the rest of the people might just prefer to use some other search engine.

DuckDuckGo doesn’t track every click of your mouse.  Brilliant presentation, fellas. They don’t want your business. Don’t give it to them.



Dr. Roy Spencer’s Keynote Address to Ninth International Conference on Climate Change by The Elephant's Child

Dr. Roy Spencer  is the climatologist who runs, with Dr.  John Christie, the only real measures of earthly temperatures by satellite from the University of Alabama at Huntsville. He gave the keynote address to the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas on July 9, 2014.

I’ve managed to make this sound dull—”keynote address”—but it isn’t at all. He’s funny! Non technical, and even though he shows a few graphs, you will come away duly enlightened and better informed, and you will have enjoyed it. If you don’t, let me know.

Dr. Spencer clearly explains the state of Climate Science, and why nothing much has changed in the past three years. He is a delightful speaker, funny, entertaining and will clear up more than a few misconceptions about the state of the climate.



Ivar Glaever, Noble Prizewinner for Physics trashes the Global Warming psuedoscience. by The Elephant's Child

Dr. Ivar Glaever, Norwegian-American physicist and Nobel prizewinner says that global warming is basically a non-problem, and resigned from the American Physical Society. Here he carefully explains why, as Climate Depot reported:

Thank you for your letter inquiring about my membership. I did not renew it because I cannot live with the (APS) statement below (on global warming): APS: ‘The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.’

Giaever announced his resignation from APS was due to the group’s belief in man-made global warming fears. Giaever explained in his email to APS: “In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this ‘warming’ period.”

Naturally the true-believers and those who are deeply invested in the usefulness of a panic about a climate crisis, have tried to discredit every word. The claim that “97% of scientists agree” is equally bogus. Please note that we are concerned about a potential increase of 0.8º C — not a full degree, but 8/10ths of a degree.  Run for the hills!

 



President Trump Was Right to Withdraw from the Paris Climate Accords by The Elephant's Child

CXaeNM4UwAELrMU

The Climate narrative insists that the globe (the whole earth) is warming (not just regional warming), and the warming that has occurred sine 1950 is remarkable, frightening, unnatural and unprecedented. It is the people’s fault—human impact. We did it with our reluctance to shut down all pipelines and rely on gentle wind and soft, warm solar rays, instead of something that would actually power a vast economy.

In 2016 a search of the peer-reviewed scientific literature has found dozens of paleoclimate reconstructions that show that modern “global” warming hasn’t been global in scale at all, for there are many regions on Earth where the climate has been cooling for decades. And even if the warming was on a global scale—the evidence shows that the modern warming is not unusual or even much different than it has been in the past.

Today’s warm temperatures don’t even come close to the maximum temperatures achieved earlier in the Holocene, or as recently as the Medieval Warm Period, 1000 years ago, when there weren’t effluents from modern transportation, factories, dreaded fossil fuels. The warming in recent decades is not even unusual within the context of the last 80 years. The warmth in the 1930s and 1940s matched or exceeded the warmth of the late 20th and 21st centuries in many of the world’s regions. There was even a widely publicized period in the 1960s and 1970s when there was substantial cooling – 0.5º C in the Northern Hemisphere and -1.5º C in the Arctic. Back then they were calling it “Nuclear Winter” and the Club of Rome got all excited about it.

Scientists have kept on publishing their work, and it has been peer-reviewed. The thing is that ordinary people don’t dig into the evidence, and a great many ordinary people just accept what they have been told by Al Gore (who is not a scientist) and others without even trying to understand the reality themselves.

You surely would not be surprised to learn that not everyone’s motives are pure, and that the aim of the Global Warming Panic crowd is political and not scientific at all. The aim has been a vast redistribution of wealth from the rich nations to the poor nations, and the destruction of Capitalism as the engine of growth and wealth on the planet that has helped to raise the poor people of the world out of hunger and poverty. (They are still, in spite of all evidence, just sure that socialism will make everybody equal and get rid of all those nasty bankers.)

Here is a collection of 60 peer-reviewed scientific papers  published within the last year that undermine the “consensus” position that modern warming is unusual, global in extent, or that today’s slight warming is unusual or unprecedented. (There is, by the way no 97% consensus. That’s a talking point, not reality.)

Also, I just ran into a June 9 post from Climate Depot headlined “Unusually Thick Arctic ice pack traps boats, triggers rescue operation off Newfoundland” If you follow this link, there’s a dandy picture of boats trapped in heavy ice off La Scie, Newfoundland, and the rescue operation to save them.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, California’s endless winter still has 8 feet of snow on the ground in the central Sierra — rivaling the massive winter of 1982-83. Mammoth Mountain will still be open daily for skiers into August.

You might consider the possibility that President Trump knew what he was doing when he withdrew (to screams of agony from the Left) from the unratified Paris Climate Accords.



If It Weren’t So Serious, It Would Be Funny! by The Elephant's Child

The progressive temper-tantrum is getting really tiresome, but all that kicking and screaming is devolving into some kind of weird suicide pact.  When President Trump rejected the Paris Climate Treaty, which had never been ratified by the Senate, “the states of California, New York and Washington have announced that they will unilaterally and illegally enter into a foreign treaty rejected by the President of the United States.”

The Constitution is very clear about this. “No state shall enter into any treaty.” Governor Cuomo of New York has been equally clear. “New York State is committed to meeting the standards set forth in the Paris Accord regardless of Washington’s irresponsible actions.”

Cuomo’s statement conveniently comes in French, Chinese and Russian translations.

“It is a little bold to talk about the China-California partnership as though we were a separate nation, but we are a separate nation,” Governor Brown of California announced.

That’s Daniel Greenfield. He added:

The Climate Alliance of California, New York, Washington, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado, Hawaii, Virginia and Rhode Island looks a lot like the Confederacy’s Montgomery Convention. Both serve as meeting points for a secessionist alliance of states to air their grievances against the Federal government over an issue in which they are out of step with the nation.

That’s as effective as the media’s vast confidence that the Comey hearings today would provide the necessary evidence to impeach the President. Or these states’ confidence that offering sanctuary to illegal immigrants would prove that they really are good people who welcome immigrants of all kinds from all places. The scientific evidence shows clearly that by 2100, the Paris Climate Accords would have made no observable difference in the climate. But feeling good about yourself is the important thing. That’s why events like Ariana Grande’s concert in Manchester resulted in a vast outpouring of a mountain of flowers and lots and lots of candles, which makes no observable difference in the safety of British citizens. Heather MacDonald explained:

The candlelight vigils didn’t work. After the Manchester Arena suicide bombing in England last month, liberal pundits suggested “mass vigils” and “community solidarity” as a counterterrorism response. The most important imperative, according to the media intelligentsia, was to signal that the West’s commitment to “diversity” and “inclusion” was intact.

Unfortunately, the three Islamic terrorists who used a van and knives to kill another seven civilians and critically injure dozens more in London on Saturday night were unmoved by the “diversity” message. Witnesses described the killers frantically stabbing anyone they could reach, while shouting “This is for Allah”; one witness said that a girl was stabbed up to 15 times.

The “candlelight vigil” counsel has been more muted after this latest attack, though the New York Times has predictably advised the candidates in Britain’s upcoming elections not to succumb to “draconian measures” or to do “just what the terrorists want” by undermining democratic values.

In a second article from City Journal, Heather MacDonald writes of “The Left’s Unilateral Suicide Pact: After the Manchester bombing, liberals once again avoid the obvious—that Islamic terror in the West is an immigration problem.”

A rethinking of immigration policies is off the table. Nothing that an Islamic terrorist can do will ever shake the left-wing commitment to open borders—not mass sexual assaults, not the deliberate slaughter of gays, and not, as in Manchester last week, the killing of young girls. The real threat that radical Islam poses to feminism and gay rights must be disregarded in order to transform the West by Third World immigration. Defenders of the open-borders status quo inevitably claim that if a terrorist is a second-generation immigrant, like Abedi, immigration policy has nothing to do with his attack. (Abedi’s parents emigrated to Britain from Libya; his immediate family in Manchester lived in the world’s largest Libyan enclave outside Africa itself.) …

The fact that second-generation immigrants are not assimilating into Western culture makes immigration policy more, not less, of a pressing matter. It is absurd to suggest that Abedi picked up his terrorist leanings from reading William Shakespeare and William Wordsworth, rather than from the ideology of radical Islam that has been imported into Britain by mass immigration.

Myron Magnet echoes Heather MacDonald’s concerns.” Governments, he reminds us, exist to keep citizens safe in their streets and cities from foreign or domestic violence”

Start by naming the enemy, as Donald Trump and Theresa May finally have done, after eight years of Barack Obama’s dereliction of duty for refusing to utter the simple words, “Islamist terrorism.” As numerous pundits—notably Andrew C. McCarthy, successful prosecutor of the 1993 Islamist World Trade Center bombers—have explained, Islamism, a large subcategory of Islam, is not only a religion but also a political ideology that aims at world domination, so that treating it as if, like Christianity or Judaism, it preaches only individual salvation or virtue is mistaken at best, willfully blind at worst.

You have perhaps noticed that there are only two positions regarding immigration. You are expected to favor all immigration because “we are all immigrants”, and if you don’t, it’s Islamophobia, Nativism, Fascism of course, and Nationalism. Other epithets when they seem to fit. We have a million and a half people who wish to become Americans who have applied properly, paid their fees and are patiently waiting for their turn to immigrate. I fail to understand why illegals, who are breaking the law, should take precedence over those who are following the law. We are a sovereign nation, we have immigration laws, and there is no reason why they should be suspended because Democrats want more immigrants who might vote for them.

The Leftist states are not just attempting to secede, but unfortunately they’re not very good at economics either. They are furious that the new administration is attempting to get rid of ObamaCare, and plan to adopt single-payer or completely socialized medical care on their own.

Vermont, Colorado , New York and California have so-called “single payer” health care proposals far enough along to have some serious numbers  about incremental costs above and beyond the existing state government expenses for things like Medicaid. In every case the incremental costs came in at more than all the revenue from all existing state taxes, so enacting single-payer would require more than doubling existing state taxes.

There are lots of people who believe that there is lots of “government money” without realizing that the government has no money of it’s own, only what it collects in taxes.

Connecticut is close to bankruptcy. California cannot afford her useless high-speed train to nowhere, and attempting to add single-payer health care, is going to add California to the list. The sunshine state is already over $1 trillion in the hole for employee pension underfunding. They don’t call Jerry Brown “Governor Moonbeam” for no reason. Illinois, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts and New Jersey  are not far behind with underfunded pensions.

Temper tantrums  are one thing, but secession, thwarting the law, bankruptcy, and attempts to illegally enter into a foreign treaty and to promote violence simply because you lost an election is going too far.

 



The Dakota Access Pipeline Is Now Delivering Light, Sweet Crude Oil by The Elephant's Child

The Dakota Access Pipeline was big news all over the world last fall, and I devoted eight posts to the elaborate protests. Progressives and progressive celebrities rallied to the opportunity to protest, held marches and raised over a million dollars on social media. Thousands of people traveled to North Dakota and the Standing Rock Reservation to join the main protest camp. It was the final mile of the 1,200 mile long pipeline that was the center of everything. Lots of blather about saving our sacred water and that sort of thing. All noise, no content.

The Obama administration drummed up a new environmental study that would have taken around two years to complete and was announced by an Assistant Secretary of the Army who overruled the Army Corps of Engineers recommendation that the pipeline be approved, just a couple of days before President Trump was inaugurated. On February 7th, the new Trump administration ended the study, approved construction, and a few weeks later the police arrived to clear out the mess left by the protesters.

It was some mess!  It took 240 rollout dumpsters and more than a million dollars to clean up the debris left by the protesters, including some abandoned dogs and puppies, who were rescued. If progressives are  so sure that they care deeply for the environment, are they oblivious to the fact that their actions belie their smugness.

The 1200-mile long pipeline is transporting light, sweet crude oil from North Dakota through South Dakota and Iowa to a distribution point in Illinois and the Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline on down to the Gulf Coast. Energy Transfer Partners said they have commitments for about 520,000 barrels of oil daily. This is more direct, cost-effective and far safer and environmentally responsible than the alternative modes of transportation like rail and truck.




%d bloggers like this: