Global warming induced asteroid fly-bys

One of the great things about the end of the year is the tendency of the media to do their nostalgia pieces on the year that was. While most of them are rubbish, there are some gems among them, especially the ones that deal with the sillier parts, and in particular, the more absurd claims of global warming frantics.

Even better and more idiotic than that, are the efforts of the liberal media ‘sophisticates’ who are ever anxious to show off their belief in the new trendy GW religion, with claims that everything bad is GW related.

Deborah Feyerick makes the effort here with a question of the ‘weather guy’ Bill Nye, about an asteroid fly by and whether it might be induced by climate change:

 This is somewhat like some of the movie scenes where the piss is taken from media anchors, except you just can’t make this stuff up. Note the deliciously threatening ‘only fifteen minutes from disaster’ statement from Nye.

 Warnings of near earth fly bys gives NASA a reason to feel relevant and scientists a source of government money to ‘study’ this phenomenon with an eye to finding a defense mechanism. This in turn gives the government a chance to appear to be doing something about it.

 The best chance we have at present seems to be Bruce Willis in his role in ‘Armageddon’ where he destroyed one, however thirty years in the drilling industry has made me a little skeptical of that possibility.

 The most you can hope for otherwise is that the good people of NASA will either not find an earth destroying asteroid, or if they do, will be able to issue you with a warning in time to give you the opportunity to kiss your arse goodbye.

Piers Morgan cops a beating from Brett Lee

Here is a bit of joy for non-liberals, non-Piers Morgan tragics, and non-CNN fans.

The Brett Lee Vs Piers Morgan showdown that was alluded to in a previous post occurred today. The origins of it was Morgan’s trenchant criticism of the English batsmen for being ‘gutless’ while facing the express bowling of the Australian fast bowlers, during the Adelaide test match.

Ian Healy of the commentary team covering the match, pointed out that Morgan had never played more than grade cricket and wouldn’t have a clue as to what facing up to bowlers of this quality involved. Retired Australian paceman, Brett Lee then issued a challenge, which Morgan accepted.

After being hit in the head by a warm-up ball prior to the event, he was hit by Lee in the back, twice in the ribs, once in the wrist, fell over avoiding another, and was comprehensively bowled:

Image: Morgan’s wrist after copping one from Lee.

It is doubtful that many Australians realized who he was, other than just another Pom. He was introduced as the most watched talk show host in America, which would have CNN creaming its jeans, however such a claim is wildly inaccurate unless FNC is excluded from the survey.

Brett Lee said he'd done a "public service" by inflicting a bit of pain, stating “he got hurt but he didn't get maimed, so that's a positive step.”

‘The Guardian’ calls for food rationing and more big government

Elitists in the halls of power in government, or in academia, think tanks, media, and elsewhere all share a love of deciding what is good and bad for us and what to do about it whether we agree or not.  Normally this involves the invoking of the good old “My will be done” clause of the authoritarian rulebook.

In Australia we have what former libertarian, John Singleton referred to as ‘the great aorta, which in its own way is the vessel that provides the blood flow to whatever the state uses in lieu of a brain, from the beating desires of those who think they know best.   They orta stop people saying, … they orta make a law to …, they orta provide more ……, they orta encourage the use of …, and so on.

In Britain, Zoe Williams of the Guardian is getting on the bandwagon of national wish lists with a call for the government to halt obesity by bringing back the sort of  rationing from the good old days of WW2: 

It's always presented as a happy accident, one of those cute paradoxes in which the second world war specialised, that rationing, in a bid to stop us starving, also stopped us getting fat. In fact, while obesity may not have featured in the planning, this isn't an accident: in order to be the kind of government that can effect that kind of public health improvement, you have to start by being the kind of government that cares whether or not your people are hungry. You have to be the kind of government that takes what people are putting on their tables every night as its most urgent and pressing business. 

At the end of rationing (which was incredibly unpopular, let's not forget – nobody enjoys being told how much bacon they're allowed) not only was there much less obesity, but other indicators of a nation's health – birth weight, infant mortality – also improved. At a recent Women's Institute history night, I saw for the first time a full list of what the rations actually were. 

I concluded ruefully that they were so meagre (one egg a week, 50g of butter) that I don't think I'd bother eating, I'd just live on protein powder and alcohol. But that's not the point; when one discusses rationing, it's in the context of national circumstances so straitened that everybody simply had to eat less, because there wasn't enough. But the next stage of that logical process is never discussed – which is that it was a fear, really, for the poor not having enough that led to a policy for everyone. 

Circumstances weren't so dire that rich people would have starved, or even people in the middle: the concern was a) that scarcity would falsely inflate prices, so people who could previously afford to eat would be priced out; and b) that people would hoard. The hoarding point is interesting as it gives the lie to a narrative often tacitly peddled, that human nature during the war was better than it is now, more self-sacrificing, less demanding, more generous. 

But more important is that point about prices – all markets favour the rich. In times of scarcity, though, the poor are disadvantaged by an amount so stark that you can't count it. Whatever the price is, the entire point is that it will be too much for that group, so that demand is reduced and supply at the top can remain at normal levels. It's like a bully holding a boy's satchel 5cm higher than he can jump. That much was obvious in the 1940s, and you would hope it would be again today, unless 30 years of neoliberalism has totally hollowed out our sense of reason. …

It seems strange to base an argument for rationing to prevent obesity, (which is caused by plentiful food for the entire population) on scarcity.  The author seems to be making an argument for price controls, which accompanied the rationing of that period, making the accompanying black market profitable.

The entire column though is full of authoritarian dogma.  It rails against hoarding; the prudent stocking up of non perishable foodstuffs and products likely to be in short supply.

There is also the quaint belief that ‘markets favor the rich’.  An unfettered free market creates plentiful food to the point where surpluses are exported, and even the poorest can eat well.  In a rationing and price control regime, many products disappear from the shelves but usually will reappear from under the counter if the customer can come up with a suitable offer, or knows someone who has the product for the right price.

It is not the free market which favors the rich, it is the state manipulated ‘orderly’ market that does so while discriminating against those with limited means as an unintended consequence.

Then again, this is a writer who believes that the only reason people would object to rationing in times of plenty is the fault of 'neoliberalism' 'hollowing out' our dense of reason.  Yep, Zoe, they all need your own special brand of good ol socialism.

The Environmental Multinationals have lost their Way.

By Viv Forbes, Chairman,

The carbon Sense Coalition 

Many groups have much to lose as the theory that humans are driving dangerous and accelerating global warming is progressively exposed as science fiction.

Those in most danger are the multinational environmental empires and the politicians who have supported them.



Once upon a time the World Wildlife Fund was mainly about saving wildlife – now its pre-occupation seems to be how to destroy the coal industry in order to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is the gas of life, and the additional carbon dioxide is known to be fuelling the green revolution which has caused increased growth of all green things. WWF is thus now anti-green.



Greenpeace also has forgotten the green bit and is now more interested in saddling us with a tax on carbon, the key element of all life.



And instead of working for refugees, Oxfam was prominent among the dozens of “charities” acting more like stop-work agitators at the climate grabfest in Warsaw. (Yes it was a grab-fest – most of the attendees were there hoping to grab a big heap of cash from a few western bunnies for “Climate Compensation”.)



See: Green groups walk out of UN climate talks


And how do Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club accept the massive environmental destruction caused by thousands of bird-killing bat-killing wind turbines with their spider-webs of roads and transmission lines? The wind mania will collapse as soon as its subsidies disappear. Who is then going to clean up their mess? Will we see volunteers from FOE dismantling derelict windmills and rehabilitating their access tracks and transmission lines and towers?



Solar Panels Frying Birds Along Major Migration Path:


Wind Turbines slaughter rare birds: 

 Image Source: 

And why should these economic vandals be assisted by tax concessions while they spend much of their time and energy locking-the-gate on activities that could generate tax revenue such as exploration, mining, grazing, land development, irrigation, fishing, tourism and forestry? Green extremists have lost sight of their once-worthy aims to now become forces of pointless obstruction and destruction of all human activities.



And why should the CSIRO be funded lavishly by tax payers while they waste billions trying to prop up failing climate theories, models and scares?



The ice caps have not melted, the oceans are not overheating, sea levels are just fluctuating, the polar bears are thriving and the Sahara is regaining vegetation. It is foxes and cats that are destroying native wildlife, not drilling for gas. And real human pollution of the oceans, rivers and atmosphere gets little attention while green dreamers in parliament are focussed on maintaining the carbon tax.

Cartoon: Steve Hunter  
(PS. Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Gas and Big Government have been quite stingy lately with grants to Carbon Sense so Steve has not been paid. Send us some subscriptions or we will both starve.)



All manias unravel, and the climate mania has started down this road. Already supporters are jumping ship as the reaction accelerates.



Politicians too have played a dangerous game with energy supplies.



The icy tentacles of yet another cold winter are once again sneaking down from the ice-covered Arctic and causing shivers on the northern plainsof Europe and America.



Sometime soon, on a still winter night in Northern Europe, snow will drift down silently, covering the German solar panels with a cold white blanket, and quietly surrounding the motionless British wind turbines like skirmishers ahead of the invading vandals. Green power will fail, the lights will flicker, the heaters will go cold, and some people may start to recognise that reliable heat, light and power from coal, oil, gas and nuclear is humanity’s greatest asset after all.



Next morning, the BBC will report the record high temperature reached at Marble Bar in summertime Australia.



But later in the day, awkward questions will be asked in Parliament. 



And, at the next election, heads will roll.

Duck Dynasty star's suspension “fascist and Stalinist”; Camille Paglia

For those on another planet or who haven’t seen the show, Duck Dynasty is a sort of ‘reality show’ based on the lives of a real life family from the Louisiana bayous whose success is based on their production of duck hunting accessories.  The stars, the Robertson family, base their lifestyle around hunting and strong Christian conservative attitudes.

It is an immensely popular show with an estimated sixteen million regular viewers.

Patriarch of the show, Phil Robertson has been suspended from it owing to his views on what constitutes sinfulness including homosexuality, as expressed in an interview in GQ.  Some of his comments have been dropped from the article, but according to Katie Pavlich at Townhall included: 

GQ. What, in your mind, is sinful? 

Robertson. “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right. 

“We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?

This has caused consternation in GLAAD and other gay rights groups who believe that equality is not enough and demand universal approval.  They have successfully lobbied for his dismissal.

Lesbian libertarian, Camille Paglia has slammed the decision and the groups who demanded it as fascists, labeling it as Stalinist and a violation of free speech: 

“I speak with authority here, because I was openly gay before the ‘Stonewall Rebellion,’ when it cost you something to be so,” said Paglia. “And I personally feel as a libertarian that people have the right to free thought and free speech.” 

It’s unlikely that you need any background, but Phil Robertson Became the target of GLAAD and other one-track advocates for gay rights after his remarks in a GQ article reflecting personal views on the depravity of homosexuality and other Biblical sins went viral. A&E responded to GLAAD pressure by indefinitely banning him from appearing in future episodes of “Duck Dynasty.” 

That, according to Paglia, was a “fascist,” freedom-squelching move. 

“In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as they have the right to support homosexuality – as I 100 percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right to religious freedom there … to express yourself in a magazine in an interview. This is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, okay? – that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades. It’s the whole legacy of the free-speech 1960s that have been lost by my own party.” 

Don’t look under any rocks for more ideological liberals to join Paglia in the Robertsons’ defense. Then again – the Duck Commander clan likely doesn’t need it. A Facebook page protesting A&E’s decision to yank Phil had received 800,000 “likes” by late Thursday – only a few hours after it first went online.

For A&E, this is not a matter of freedom of speech; they have the right to hire and fire as they wish, on any pretext.

The real fascists in this are those who wish to muzzle any form of opinion that disagrees with their own, or disapproves of the cause they are advocating.  Unfortunately, it appears that they are winning. 

EU banning E-cigarettes

Anti smoking hysterics are constantly on the prowl looking for ways and excuses to place further bans on their favorite cause.  It almost makes you believe that they want people to quit the habit except for the fact that they attempt to ban just about everything that will help in doing this.

Their latest cause célèbre is the humble E-cigarette, which seems to be on the outer everywhere with the EU joining the rush to stop them.  The only resistance being offered is predictably, from the libertarian aligned UKIP:

Armed staff member stopped school shooter

Cartoon: By Glenn McCoy 

After the Sandy Hook School shooting tragedy, the NRA and others were roundly ridiculed for the suggestion that some of these events could be averted or minimized by arming teachers or other staff members.  Liberal policy makers love to cling to their ideas of gun-free zones making people safe despite mounting evidence that the opposite is the case.

The latest shooting at Arapahoe High School in Centennial, Colorado has vindicated the NRA and some of the saner commentators by virtue of the fact that the shooter killed himself when confronted by an armed staff member: 

… Robinson said that after Pierson entered the high school at approximately 12:33 p.m. Friday, near the student parking lot, he asked for the teacher by name. At one point, Pierson went into the library, where Murphy actually was located, but a janitor initiated a lockdown and Murphy was able to escape as Pierson entered the room. 

After that, Pierson set off one of the Molotov cocktails, setting at least three bookshelves on fire, investigators told KDVR.com. When an armed school resource officer entered the room, Pierson believed he was cornered and turned his gun on himself, Robinson said.  The entire attack lasted approximately 80 seconds and was captured by security cameras. …

It is difficult to ascertain what the result would have been had there not been an armed staff member present; the killer intended to shoot a teacher who had dropped him off the debating team, however he had fired randomly down a hallway wounding a female student.  It stands to reason though, that leaving the school to deny him his target saved the life of the teacher, and the armed resource officer potentially saved a number of lives.