Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for December, 2007

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Scientists today try to insist that no true scientist can believe in creation or in the inspiration of the bible. They are wrong, for there are thousands of living scientists who believe in recent creation, who believe in Christ and have accepted him as their personal Savior, and believe in the inerrancy and full authority of the bible. Over a thousand such men have belonged to one particular organization, the Creation Research Society, and there are numerous similar organizations around the world.

Many, and probably most, of the greatest scientists of all times, the founding fathers of science, believed in a personal Creator God, the inspiration of the Bible, and special creation. They professed faith in Christ and the gospel. Whether all were truly ‘born again”, we cannot know, some were unorthodox in their specific doctrinal beliefs, but all were creationists.

A tabulation with the disciplines of the particular discoveries of inventions they made is below. Surely it’s wrong for anyone to think that one cannot be a true scientist and still believe in creation.

Scientific Disciplines Established by Bible-Believing Scientists

Antiseptic surgery, Joseph Lister, 1827-1912.

Bacteriology, Louis Pasteur, 1822-1895.

Calculus, Isaac Newton, 1642-1727.

Celestial Mechanics, Johann Kepler, 1571-1639.

Chemistry, Robert Boyle, 1627-1691.

Comparative Anatomy, George Cuvier, 1769-1832.

Computer Science, Charles Babbage, 1792-1871.

Dimensional Analysis, Lord Rayleigh, 1842-1919.

Dynamics, Isaac Newton, 1642-1727.

Electrodynamics, James Clarm Maxwell, 1831-1879.

Electromagnetics, Michael Faraday, 1791-1867.

Electronics, Ambrose Fleming, 1849-1945.

Energetics, Lord Kelvin, 1824-1907.

Entomologyof Living Insects, Henri Fabre, 1823-1915.

Field Theory, Michael Faraday, 1791-1867.

Fluid Mechanics, George Stokes, 1819-1903.

Galactic Astronomy, William Herschel, 1738-1822.

Gas Dynamics, Robert Boyle, 1627-1691.

Genetics, Gregor Mendel, 1822-1884.

Glacial Geology, Louis Agassiz, 1807-1873.

Gynecology, James Simpson, 1811-1870.

Hydraulics, Leonardo da Vinci, 1452-1519.

Hydrography, Matthew Maury, 1806-1873.

Hydrostatics, Blaise Pascal, 1623-1662.

Ichthyology, Louis Agassiz, 1807-1873.

Isotopic Chemistry, William Ramsay, 1852-1916.

Model Analysis, Lord Rayleigh, 1842-1919.

Natural History, John Ray, 1627-1705.

Non-Euclidean Geometry, Bernhard Riemann, 1826-1866.

Oceanography, Matthew Maury, 1806-1873.

Optical Mineralogy, David Brewster, 1781-1868.

Paleontology, John Woodward, 1665-1728.

Pathology, Rudolph Virchow, 1821-1902.

Physical Astronomy, Johann Kepler, 1571-1630.

Reversible Thermodynamics, James Clark Maxwell, 1831-1879.

Stratigraphy, Nicholas Steno, 1631-1686.

Systemic Biology, Carolus Linnaeus, 1707-1778.

Thermodynamics, Lord Kelvin, 1824-1907.

Thermokinetics, Humphrey Davy, 1778-1829.

Vertebrate Paleontology, Georges Cuvier, 1769-1832.

-The Defender’s Study Bible, Dr. Henry M. Morris, appendix 7, pp. 1518-1529.

Notable Inventions, Discoveries or Developments by Bible-Believing Scientists

Absolute Temperature Scale – Lord Kelvin, 1824-1907.

Actuarial Tables, Charles Babbage, 1792-1871.

Barometer, Blaise Pascal, 1623-1662.

Biogenesis Law, Louis Pasteur, 1822-1895.

Calculating Machine, Charles Babbage, 1792-1872.

Chloroform, James Simpson, 1811-1870.

Classification System, Carolus Linneaus, 1707-1778.

Double Stars, William Herschel, 1738-1822.

Electric Generator, Michael Faraday, 1791-1867.

Electric Motor, Joseph Henry, 1797-1878.

Ephemeris Tables, Johann Kepler, 1571-1630.

Fermentation Control, Louis Pasteur, 1822-1895.

Galvanometer, Joseph Henry, 1797-1878.

Global Star Catalog, John Hsrchel, 1792-1871.

Inert Gases, William Ramsay, 1852-1916.

Kaleidoscope, David Brewster, 1781-1868.

Law of Gravity, Isaac Newton, 1642-1727.

Mine Safety Lamp, Humphrey Davy, 1778-1829.

Pasteurization, Louis Pasteur, 1822-1895.

Reflecting Telescope, Isaac Newton, 1642-1727.

Scientific Method, Francis Bacon, 1561-1626.

Self-Induction, Joseph Henry, 1797-1878.

Telegraph, Ambrose Fleming, 1849-1945.

Tran-Atlantic Cable, Lord Kelvin, 1824-1907.

Vaccination and Immunization, Louis Pasteur, 1822-1895.

This tabulation showing that many of the founding fathers of modern science were men who believed inGod, the Bible and creation, was first published as an ICR “Impact Article” in Acts and Facts, (January, 1982), then in Men of Science, Men of God, by Henry M. Morris (San Diego Master Books, 1982, 1988), 107 pp.

Defenders Bible, pp. 1521-1522, appendix 7.

Read Full Post »

This was brought to my attention by the Renaissance biologist. From Aurora at the Midnight Sun referring to this article:

Christianity is to be phased out by the EU and replaced by the more controlling Islam.

Frankfurt Subversion is a Marxist technique of subverting a country, in order that it may be made to collapse and then be taken over. Karl Marx was of Russian Jewish Descent.

Frankfurt Subversion

It is a strategy largely based on the tactics of divide and conquer.

One of the original aims of Communism was to unify Europe with the USSR, when the Soviet Union was ‘brought down, they simply carried on a multifaceted attack against the West.

Frankfurt subversion attacks a country’s major strengths, its major industries, its menfolk, its police, its armed services, its religion, and its family unity creating a spiritual vacuum, actively promoting unmarried parenting. The promotion of Feminism, Homosexuality in society ( even in our schools ), the demonisation of the church, repeated accusations of Paedophilia against Clergy, Divisive issues like Women clergy, Homosexual clergy all to cause divisions within the church ( and Only the Christian Church you will note ) and its followers.

Destroying our Christian Heritage, to be replaced by Islam, the smoking ban for example was designed to empty the pubs, they will now begin to slowly prohibit alcohol altogether.

The nuclear family is attacked by promoting radical feminism, single parents, demonization of fathers, separating children from their fathers.

Diluting of National Identity by flooding the country with Mass Immigration enticed by generous housing and welfare whilst at the same time, Govt Medical advisers suggest women in Britain should continue taking the pill because it may ward off cancer, it doesn’t and totally ignoring increased risks of heart related problems.

In addition 1 in 5 pregnancies in this country end up being aborted.

This is Social Engineering. Encourage the suppression of British birth rates, and flooding the country with Imported Europeans who have little or no interest in Britain’s history, culture, in short, in order to create the EU Soviet empire, the British ( and European ) Peoples are being replaced, exterminated.

Ask yourself, If we ever needed more people, why not give that generous welfare to British couples to have more children?

Another way in which the Govt undermines our Society is by prohibiting parents and teachers from disciplining children then later on, promoting 24 hr drinking, relaxing drug laws. Then deliberately withdrawing the police off the streets through unnecessary paperwork, and or replacing them with ineffectual PCSO’s:

later accusing society of these failings. Lack of law and order no religion then suggesting we should adopt Islamic Principles.

This is called Social Engineering and is already happening in the UK.

Frankfurt Subversion on Wikipedia

UNLIMITED MUSLIM PASSAGE TO THE UK and the Europeans FORCED to respect the Religion

Europe Sold out for oil

Sharia law spreading in the UK

Dutch and Swedish Ministers admitting Islam is to be the Dominant Culture

Gates of Vienna:  Exit Sweden 

Pope says ‘ATTEMPTS TO ISLAMIFY EUROPE…..CANNOT BE DENIED’………

ttonpoboxhhy.jpg

Allah takes over the catholic church

Three little pigs.

Psychological suppression using Political Correctness:

Into the fragmented vacuum of our Nations subverted spirituality. Sharia Law Is Spreading.

British School Children converted to Islam, making Islamic Affirmations to Allah in school.

Conversion to Islam? Are Muslim children forced to pray to God ( Would Muslims be forced to pray to God?)

British Children told in school they must avert their eyes, ( already telling them they are second class citizens ).

Criminalising British children as young as three yrs of age.

Polygamy

Genital Mutilation, up to 60,000 a year in the UK.

Goodbye Sweden.

Brussels Journal: Jihad and the collapse of the Swedish model

Goodbye France. France’s unreported race riots lasted a WHOLE YEAR, on average 112 Cars torched PER DAY.

The Daily Telegraph: Is France on the way to becoming an Islamic state?

Brussels Journal: The Fall of France and the Multicultural World War

Brussels Journal: Beheading Nations: The Islamization of Europe’s Cities

Dutch and Swedish Ministers admitting Islam is to be the Dominant Culture.
http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1016000

Gates of Vienna: Exit Sweden

The death of Sweden

Read Full Post »

WSJ’s article, “Not so Hot” spells it out.

The latest twist in the global warming saga is the revision in data at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, indicating that the warmest year on record for the U.S. was not 1998, but rather 1934 (by 0.02 of a degree Celsius).

Canadian and amateur climate researcher Stephen McIntyre discovered that NASA made a technical error in standardizing the weather air temperature data post-2000. These temperature mistakes were only for the U.S.; their net effect was to lower the average temperature reading from 2000-2006 by 0.15C.

The new data undermine another frightful talking point from environmentalists, which is that six of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 1990. Wrong. NASA now says six of the 10 warmest years were in the 1930s and 1940s, and that was before the bulk of industrial CO2 emissions were released into the atmosphere.

Of course a lot of us have been hip to this for quite some time, but the liberals are still clutching to their faith of the Church of Global Warming with the hopes they can just shove it down our throats. This Hansen fellow is a real piece of work:

James Hansen, NASA’s ubiquitous climate scientist and a man who has charged that the Bush Administration is censoring him on global warming, has been unapologetic about NASA’s screw up. He claims that global warming skeptics — “court jesters,” he calls them — are exploiting this incident to “confuse the public about the status of knowledge of global climate change, thus delaying effective action to mitigate climate change.”

So let’s get this straight: Mr. Hansen’s agency makes a mistake in a way that exaggerates the extent of warming, and this is all part of a conspiracy by “skeptics”? It’s a wonder there aren’t more of them.

Read Full Post »

Alan Caruba:

False Consensus Was Predicted

Indeed, back in November 2004, German climatologist Hans von Storch, director of the GKSS Institute for Coastal Research (IfK) in Geesthacht, Germany, foresaw that claims of alarmist consensus would be made by non-scientists and even some scientists.

Von Storch, who has yet to side with either alarmists or skeptics, warned, “We need to respond openly to the agenda-driven advocates, not only skeptics but also alarmists, who misuse their standing as scientists to pursue their private value-driven agendas.”
Media Echo Scariest Claims

Noting the propensity of large media organizations to echo the alarmists’ claims, von Storch wrote, “Judgments of solid scientific findings are often not made with respect to their immanent quality but on the basis of their alleged or real potential as a weapon by ‘skeptics’ in a struggle for dominance in public and policy discourse.”

Ebell agrees: “If the debate is over, why do they exaggerate so much? It seems that once some scientist makes any sort of speculation about the extent or impact of future warming that sounds even slightly scary, then we never hear the end of it, no matter how many times subsequent research refutes it.

“After reading hundreds of scientific articles and consulting widely on what they mean and how they fit together, I am convinced that if there is a consensus, it is not alarmist,” said Ebell.

Not that we should pay any attention to a German climatologist that doesn’t belong to the Church of Global Warming, LOL

Also, Sphere is not showing that I linked to this article, so I’m going to link numerous times to this WSJ article…

Read Full Post »

This is interesting, passed on to me by Rotty through email, since he knows I always enjoy a good row.

The standoff beings with begins with the Devil’s Kitchen, pointing to a post by Tom Nelson at Climate Resistance who took on the quest for the holy grail; the qualifications of the IPCC “climate experts” whose “science” we aren’t allowed to question. This, because the “debate is over” and the “science is settled”, despite the 400 dissenters that showed up in Bali. The truth of the matter is, The Church of Global Warming doesn’t want to hear any other opinions, which is not science. Science is supposed to be open to honest testing of a hypothesis. The only why you get a real answer is if you’re open to finding out what the truth is. This isn’t the case in terms of the global warming freaks.

So we downloaded IPCC WGII’s latest report on “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”. There were 380 contributors to the report [PDF of contributors].

*snip*

..so we focused on the contributors who operate in the UK. Of the 51 UK contributors to the report, there were 5 economists, 3 epidemiologists, 5 who were either zoologists, entomologists, or biologists. 5 worked in civil engineering or risk management / insurance. 7 had specialisms in physical geography (we gave the benefit of the doubt to some academics whose profiles weren’t clear about whether they are physical or human geographers). And just 10 have specialisms in geophysics, climate science or modelling, or hydrology. But there were 15 who could only be described as social scientists. If we take the view that economics is a social science, that makes 20 social scientists. This gives the lie to Dessler’s claim that IPCC contributors are analogous to medical doctors.

Emphasis mine. HA! Just as in the case of Rachel Carson, the marine biologist, we’re supposed to ignore the real data for the purpose of kneeling at the environmental alter and sacrifice blood and treasure on the basis of lies. This also gives the lie to “climatologists'” claims in general about warming, that we’re not supposed to question the holy writ that comes from the IPCC panel, because they’re the ‘experts’.

We were surprised by the results. Was the prevalence of social scientists from the UK representative of the whole group? We decided to repeat the test for the contributors based in the USA.

Of the 70 US contributors, there were 7 economists, 13 social scientists, 3 epidemiologists, 10 biologists/ecologists, 5 engineers, 2 modellers/statisticians, 1 full-time activist (and 1 part time), 5 were in public health and policy, and 4 were unknowns. 17 worked in earth/atmospheric sciences. Again, we gave the benefit of the doubt to geographers where it wasn’t clear whether their specialism was physical, or human geography.

1 full-time activist and 1 part-time! This blows my mind and is an outrage! I’m certain that the same results would be achieved by going down the entire list, no matter where they’re originally from. This is propaganda masquerading as science!

In a follow-up post, Dessler has set about ‘Busting the ‘consensus busters” by ridiculing the qualifications of Inhofe’s 400 experts, starting with a certain Thomas Ring. In the comments section he justifies this approach:

I agree it would be quicker to simply note the qualified skeptics on the list (there are probably a few dozen), but, from a rhetorical point of view, I think pointing out these immensely unqualified members of the list is more effective.

Ring’s credentials include a degree from Case Western Reserve University in chemical engineering, still more impressive than the ones the IPCC panel has trotted out. This is even MORE amusing:

Well, we can all play that game… Included as contributors to WGII are Patricia Craig, Judith Cranage, Susan Mann, and Christopher Pfeiffer, all from Pennsylvania State University. It’s not that these people aren’t experts in their field – they probably are. Our problem with their inclusion on the list of Contributors to the IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment report is that their jobs are (in order) website-designer, administrative assistant (x2), and network administrator.

YIKES!

Also on the list is Peter Neofotis who appears to be a 2003 graduate of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology from Columbia. Are there many experts in anything who graduated in 2003? Would Dessler take his sick child to a doctor, who, according to our understanding of medical training, would have not yet qualified? Also at Columbia is Marta Vicarelli, who is a PhD candidate in ‘sustainable development’. Can she be the amongst the world’s leading experts on sustainability? It seems hard to take the claim seriously. Or what about Gianna Palmer at Wesleyan University, who, as far as we can tell, will not graduate from university until 2010?

Dessler has inadvertently thrown a light on what the real problem is with the agenda-driven IPCC ‘climate’ reports.

And yet Dessler insists that

Inhofe’s list is chock full of people without any recent, relevant research on the problem. In fact, I’m pretty sure that’s why they’re skeptics: people with the relevant experience are immediately persuaded by the evidence. This should be compared to the IPCC, which includes exclusively people with recent, relevant expertise on the problem.

There are, in fact, only about 7,000 climatologists in total, because climate was a stalled profession involving many different disciplines, and climate was considered to be something in constant flux. But still, those that are in Inhofe’s list are at least engineers, instead of administrative assistants, activists, web designers and students who aren’t destined to graduate until 2010, and so on.

Anything which can be thrown at the sceptics can be thrown at IPCC contributors.

That is not to say that social scientists and computer programmers have nothing to offer the world, or the IPCC process. They are crucial in fact. What it is to say, however, is that, when social scientists, computer programmers and administrative assistants comprise a significant proportion of IPCC contributors, the global warmer mantra that the IPCC represents the world’s top 2500 climate scientists is just plain old-fashioned not true.

It’s just a plain old-fashioned LIE, but it’s typical of the pipedreams of leftist environmentalists. Inhofe’s list is comprised of these notable characters:

Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia’s National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa

Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa

Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards

Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.

Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.

Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant

Dr. Andreas Prokoph, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology

Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa

Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.

Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta

Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.

Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria

Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax

Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.

Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta

Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.

Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.

Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary

Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.

Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.

Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists

Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia

Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia

Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review

Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand

Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia

Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville

Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.

Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS

Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland

Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment

Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change

Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey

Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway

Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand

Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001,’ Wellington, N.Z.

Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut

Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.

Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.

Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000

Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service

Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society

Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University

Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.

Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland

Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany

Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland

Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden

Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.

Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.

Dr. Arthur Rorsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health

Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist

Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

Ignoring these people, who are not students destined to graduated in 2010, and whose expertise in the area of science could definitely be greater than that of an administrative assistant, web designer and activists–Dessler concentrated on Thomas Ring, a chemical engineer by training. As if that is an example of someone who’s not ‘qualified’ in comparison with the IPCC nuts behind their exaggerated fictional reports!

DK at the Devil’s Kitchen concludes:

The IPCC are liars and as the whole anthropogenic climate change crap unravels—even on the Left—they cling ever more desperately to their outdated theories by propagating yet more obfuscations, half-truths and outright lies.

Wake up, people!—we are being lied to, and it is so that the political establishment can make complete slaves of us all.

Also see this article at the Wall Street Journal entitled “Not So Hot”.

Read Full Post »

As Benazir Bhutto’s wood flag-laden coffin was laid to rest and angry mourners protested her murder less than two weeks before elections, the Daily Telegraph proudly proclaims * Bhutto’s death is victory for Islamic hardliners at Daily Telegraph (UK), Dec 27.

Thousands mourn Bhutto as unrest spreads

Bhutto was killed after a suicide attacker shot at her and then blew himself up as she left a rally, police and witnesses said. Authorities initially said she died from bullet wounds, but Dr. Mussadiq Khan, a surgeon who treated her, said Friday that she died from shrapnel to the skull.

Funny, isn’t it, that President Pervez Musharraf’s most powerful political opponent would be assassinated so close to the election? And the official line coming from Musharraf is blaming the attack on the resurgent Islamic militants Pakistan is fighting along the border region with Afghanistan, pledging in a nationally televised speech that “we will not rest until we eliminate these terrorists and root them out.”

Unfortunately, this seems to be very similar to Karzai’s claiming the expelled Brits were holding jirgas with the Taliban.

The election was seen as a pivotal step toward restoring democracy here, eight years after Musharraf seized power in a coup. It also was intended to restore credibility to the government after Musharraf used a six-week state of emergency to arrest thousands of political opponents and crack down on the independent judiciary.

Bhutto’s death seems to be a mere extension of this crackdown, and a warning to any opponents about the upcoming election. It will be interesting to see if any voices ring out from Pakistan against Islamic extremism now…it will be the Iraq Information Minister type of pronouncements, no doubt.

Bhutto as representative of Pakistan People’s Party, popular among legions of poor, served two terms as prime minister between 1988 and 1996. She had been vying for a third term if her party did well in the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections. She spoke openly about the need to oppose Islamic extremism and for that reason, was lauded by the west.

Jacob Laskin:

Trained at the best American and European schools, including Harvard and Oxford, Bhutto, was a natural in appealing to the Western world’s hopes that the Middle East become a more modern, more tolerant place. Her election as prime minister in 1988 only improved her standing in the West, not least because it made her the first democratically elected female prime minister in an Islamic country. Here, at last, was a woman who could lead the Islamic world from its persistent dark age.

But Bhutto was not always what she appeared to be.

Under her leadership, Pakistan in the 1990s became one the leading patrons of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Even as she promised to take her country into the 21st century, Bhutto secretly provided military and financial aid to Islamic guerillas whose ideology placed them closer to the middle ages. Publicly, she rejected any affiliation with the Taliban. Behind closed doors, she subscribed to the view that they were a pro-Pakistan force that could help stabilize Afghanistan.

Much like our Pashtun-born friend, Hamid Karzai.

Duped by Bhutto’s act was the Clinton administration and prominent Democratic Congressmen like Texas Rep. Charlie Wilson. As reporter Steve Coll noted in Ghost Wars, his detailed account of the rise of Islamic fanaticism in Afghanistan, when it came to supporting the Taliban, “Bhutto had decided that it was more important to appease the Pakistani army and intelligence services than to level with her American friends.”

Even then, there were those who cautioned that Islamic militants, once empowered, would prove impossible to control. Either out of naiveté or political calculation, Bhutto didn’t listen. Like her father before her, she failed to realize the fanatical force that she helped unleash.

The price for that terrible error in judgment, it now seems, was her life.

Of the leading suspects in yesterday’s assassination the most likely would seem to be those Taliban and al-Qaeda forces who have grown increasingly powerful in Pakistan’s lawless northwestern territories. Indeed, just prior to her return to Pakistan after an eight-year exile, a number of death threats surfaced. Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud instructed Islamist cells in Karachi to kill Bhutto upon her arrival. His command was very nearly carried out in the October suicide attack in Karachi that killed 140 people, even as Bhutto escaped unharmed. Bhutto herself suspected the Taliban and al-Qaeda suicide squads were responsible for the bombing in October.

Timeline

March 26: First joint protests organized by the parties of exiled former prime ministers Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif.

July 3-10: Pakistani troops besiege the pro-Taliban Red Mosque in Islamabad, then storm the building a week later. More than 100 people die during the course of the crisis.

July 20:
Bhutto and Musharraf hold secret meeting in Abu Dhabi on a possible power-sharing deal to sideline Sharif.

Oct 18: Bhutto returns to Karachi from Dubai after eight years in self-exile. Two suicide bombers attack her homecoming parade hours later, killing 139 people.

Oct 31: Bhutto says she has heard rumours Musharraf will impose a state of emergency and postpones planned trip to Dubai. She flies to Dubai the following day.

Nov 3:
Musharraf imposes state of emergency, suspends the constitution and arrests key opposition figures, citing Islamic extremism and judicial interference.

Oct 18: Bhutto returns to Karachi from Dubai after eight years in self-exile. Two suicide bombers attack her homecoming parade hours later, killing 139 people.

Oct 31: Bhutto says she has heard rumours Musharraf will impose a state of emergency and postpones planned trip to Dubai. She flies to Dubai the following day.

Nov 3:
Musharraf imposes state of emergency, suspends the constitution and arrests key opposition figures, citing Islamic extremism and judicial interference.

Nov 4: Police crack down on the opposition. The United States, a key Musharraf ally, voices concern.

Nov 7:
Bhutto announces plans for mass protests.

Nov 9: Hours before a planned rally in the city of Rawalpindi police Bhutto under house arrest at her Islamabad home. The order is late lifted.

Nov 11:
Musharraf say parliament will be dissolved on November 15 and elections should be held by early January.

Nov 12: Bhutto rules out further power-sharing talks with Musharraf. She is placed under house arrest again to prevent her leading a mass procession.

Nov 13:
Bhutto for the first time urges Musharraf to resign and says she will never serve under him as prime minister.

Nov 16:
Musharraf swears in the interim government. Bhutto is freed from house arrest. US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte arrives in Islamabad and speaks to Bhutto by telephone.

Nov 26: Bhutto and Sharif file their nomination papers for the election. Musharraf’s office announces he will resign from the army on November 28 and take a new oath as a
civilian leader.

Dec 27:
Bhutto is killed in a suicide attack at a campaign rally in Rawalpindi.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »