~Sophia~

After reading the exchange here related to US production and exports I decided to look up the components of exported US goods and services. Factsheet The largest export markets for U.S goods: Canada ($30.3 billion) Mexico ($19.1 billion) China ($8.9 billion) Japan ($8.2 billion) United Kingdom ($7.4 billion) ------------------------------------------------------ 1) Capital goods represent the largest goods export category (end-use) for the U.S. with $66.4 billion last year (from Feb 2008 to Feb 2009). The top export categories for capital goods products: civilian aircraft ($6.9 billion) semiconductors ($5.5 billion) telecommunications equipment ($5.0 billion) industrial machines ($4.8 billion) medicinal equipment ($4.5 billion) 2) Second largest category is industrial supplies - $44.2 billion. The top export categories for industrial supplies: plastic materials ($3.4 billion) organic chemicals ($3.3 billion) other chemicals ($3.2 billion) fuel oil ($3.2 billion) other petroleum products ($2.8 billion). 3) Third largest category is foods, feeds and beverages - represented $14.3 billion The top export categories for foods, feeds, and beverages: soybeans ($2.3 billion) meat and poultry ($2.1 billion) corn ($1.4 billion). --------------------------------- U.S. services exports totaled $84.6 billion. Services export categories: other private services ($39.0 billion) travel ($16.0 billion) royalties and license fees ($14.5 billion) other transportation ($7.8 billion) passenger fares ($4.7 billion) government services ($2.6 billion)

Not necessarily the case but even so this is not a justification for the use of force. Not for a rational moral being.

If you happen to discover gold under my house and come to me with some trade offer but I happen to refuse - force is the next recourse in your mind? And the question of whether or not you have the right to do so comes down more or less to aesthetics? Is that what you said? Humans were studying them for some time, both biologically and culturally. I did not get the impression that this was an issue of lack of understanding. To the genocide-ready military leader this was irrelevant. Recognition of rights has nothing to do with valuing another's way of life. I don't personally value Muslim values, way of life, and culture.

Andrew Bolt writes:

Criticizing bad business practices does not make one anti-business. Criticizing bad scientists or bad science does not make one anti-science. Criticizing wrong human actions does not make one anti-man.

Aliens were rational (the connection with their environment was NOT like the borg hive mind idea from Star Trek - they made their own decisions) and thus individual rights apply. Possession is grounds for property rights. Initiation of force is wrong and thus actions taken by the aliens and some humans were moral. I think that you have a very limited understanding of individual rights.

I agree. This was not anti-man movie or anti-technology. Again, I agree.

I think no compulsory limits on carbon emissions were set. I am happy about that.

It is a small part of the damage - playing the role of a smoke screen for a much greater damage done within the Western world (both in terms of wealth destruction and further loss of freedom). These funds will not be used to lift Africa from poverty but instead will result in even more corruption and strengthening of military dictatorships. These people know this too. This wealth will be wasted and at the same time they will demand of Africa reductions in industrial growth. I think it was Sudan's delegation that stated that this is a suicide pact for Africa.

This is not about compensating third world countries or lifting them up from poverty. Environmentalists, Gore, Hilary, and the rest of these people can't care less about Africa since they call for slowing down the rate of her industrialization. This is about power (centralizing it as much as possible on a global scale) and money (carbon trading stalled in the past few days - not a single contract was sold - as people are waiting for the results of Copenhagen meeting). This is red hiding under the umbrella of green. It was never about real science either (not for politicians).

Interview with Lord M from Copenhagen

Full article

One has to be careful not to fall into hasty generalizations as most scientists are honest. Scientific method is not dying. Climate research got politicized and corrupted and now we have resulting cleansing period. Good thing is that from now on any claims about global climate changes are going to be more scrutinized.

I just herd on tv that churches across the globe tolled bells today 350 times for climate change action in Copenhagen (symbolizing the optimal (according to them) level of C02 in the atmosphere). Two religions merging?

There was a quote on the sidebar of the last clip I linked to, which is rather fitting: "All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so are brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes." Guess who said that? Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf , vol.1, ch. 10, 1925

Another youtube clip. Lord Monckton talking to AGW campaigner on the street of Copenhagen.

This panel discussion featuring Keith Lockitch and Willie Soon: critique of climate change science The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights And this video places alarmist claims in a historical perspective.

One of the main IPCC creeds is that the urban heat island effect has a negligible impact on large-scale averages such as CRU or GISS. They have been insisting for years that neither urbanization nor other local instrumental or thermal effects exaggerated the reported by them global warming trend. A 6th grader with the help of his dad took the data from NASA GISS for the last 111 years and showed otherwise.

Few weeks ago there was a paper published in Nature (authored by Paul Pearson of Cardiff University) that showed some interesting results. The greenhouse atmosphere pre-cooling contained a CO2 concentration of 900 parts per million by volume, or more than three times that of the Earth in pre-industrial days. It is not certain what triggered the Earth to cool despite, or because of, its changing green-house atmospheric blanket, but once it did, cycles of ice cap formation and glaciation commenced, apparently governed by the same variations in the Earth's orbit that govern the ice ages of the past million years.While the cooling of the Earth took place over a time-span of around 200,000 years, the atmospheric CO2 first dropped in association with the cooling, then rose to around 1100ppmv and remained high for 200,000 years while the Earth cooled further and remained in its new ice ages cycle.

Which parts?

HT: Betsy via facebook from here

Lord Monckton appeared on Micheal Coren show here in Canada in Oct of this year. Very good interview (in regard to GW - cts is a multi-faith television network and religous Monckton manages to insert few faith based comments - interesting how he does not see the irony. Anyway just ignore that as the rest of what he has to say is very informative.) Part 1 (of 5) use youtube search to find the rest.

This is a result of post-modernization of science. They call it post-normal science. Here is an explanation (a must read!) The article cites Mike Hume: (some italics added) Mike Hulme is the founding director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change research, and Professor of Climate Change at UEA. He helped write reports for the UK Government, the European Commission, UNEP, UNDP, WWF-International and the IPCC. He was the co-ordinating Lead Author for the chapter on ‘Climate scenario development’ for the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC, as well as a contributing author for several other chapters. He was recently named 10th most cited climate research scientists, between 1999 and 2009.

This is turning into a comedy. Science published today Mann-et-al (same group) paper that is exposed as a scientific fraud.