To The Daily Sun,
I was amused by Dave Pollak's letter of April 21 on behalf of the man-made global warming scam. His letter fails to mention the long history of deceptions, inaccurate predictions, and mal-investments (e.g., ethanol, Solyndra) of the man-made global warming advocates. But his letter is a skillful advocacy for his political beliefs.
The fact is that most politicians want increasing amounts of money to direct to family, friends, and supporters; they use persuasive marketing techniques to justify taking that money from the people who earn it.
For example, politicians tell us our bridges are dangerous and they need more money to fix them; that's marketing. But bridge failures are rare. Obviously our truly failing infrastructure must be fixed, but politicians reveal this scam when they divert the money provided for infrastructure improvements to other projects. Obama's stimulus, about $800 billion, was enough money to fix all really bad problems, but little of the money was spent, as promised, fixing our infrastructure.
Similarly, man-made climate change is a marketing gimmick. Man-made climate change was called man-made global warming until there was no warming. Forty years ago some of today's global warming promoters were telling us to fear global cooling, until the earth started warming. A generation before that global warming was going to kill us all, before that global cooling, etc.
The scientists who Pollak calls "independent" are funded with billions of taxpayer money to generate whatever "science" the politicians use to justify taking more money from citizens.
Why do so few "peer reviewed" studies deny man-made global warming? Because the government funded organizations that control peer reviews typically refuse papers that don't support what the politicians want (remember Climategate?).
Pollak ignores all the data falsification, elimination of "inconvenient" data, disproven "facts" (e.g., the "hockey stick"), and repeated claims of impending disaster which didn't occur (e.g., the North polar icecap has grown not vanished, the oceans haven't risen as predicted, the predicted global warming simply hasn't happened).
Global warming projections are based on computer models which are only as good as their reflections of the nearly infinite variables that affect our climate, an impossible task with current knowledge and technology. But, by manipulating the model and input data, models can be made to generate the desired results, whatever the politicians want. Nevertheless the climate typically fails to cooperate with modeled projections.
Pollak tries to discredit some people who argue against man-made climate change by claiming they don't have the right college degrees, as if a degree is a meaningful indicator of expertise. (Since Lord Christopher Monckton doesn't have the "right" degree, why does Al Gore fear to debate him?) If we had to give up all the things created by people without the appropriate college degree, we'd probably have to live in 19th century conditions.
Is the earth warming? Yes. A mini ice age ended about 160 years ago and the earth has been warming since then. Global warming is good if you want more people to live (far more people die of cold than of heat).
The earth today is not nearly as warm as it was about a thousand years ago when farms (and people) flourished in northern lands (e.g., Greenland); and the earth has been much warmer than that in the past.
Is more CO2 a good thing or a bad thing? Since CO2 stimulates vegetation growth, more CO2 will help us grow more food and other useful vegetation. Actually the percent of CO2 in our atmosphere is lower than normal; an increase in CO2 would get us back toward normal.
Politicians and bureaucrats tell citizens to cut their energy use; politicians drive up our energy prices (e.g., ethanol, solar, wind, and other policies); politicians advocate reducing meat consumption because animals create greenhouse gases; but highly-paid bureaucrats funded by taxpayers travel on generous expense accounts and private jets to climate change conferences (boondoggles) in locations we would all like to visit.
But even the U.N. admits that the trillions of dollars that the politicians want to spend will have little impact on the climate (although they keep changing their claims).
The climate is going to change no matter what humans do. And, other things will impact life on earth (e.g., volcanos, earthquakes, asteroid impacts, solar flares). Humans have survived because we adapted, consider The Netherlands. Humans will adapt better to whatever happens if we are wealthier. (See "Cool It" by Bjorn Lomborg.)
Unfortunately government doesn't create wealth, it redistributes and consumes wealth. Much of the money that politicians tax away for their climate change boondoggle will be, as it has been in the past, badly invested or wasted. Government spending will reduce the growth of wealth that would enrich people's lives, improve our environment, and simplify adapting to, and surviving, whatever Mother Nature throws at us.
Last Updated on Thursday, 23 April 2015 09:51
To The Daily Sun,
I might add to the letter on cutting the tourism budget.
Most people will think this an unnecessary expenditure by the state, but they should think of all the jobs tourism supports. I believe tourism-related jobs is the biggest employer in the state (except maybe government). Cut tourism and that cuts tolls, which cuts DOT budgets. Cut tourism and that cuts liquor sales, one of the largest revenue producers the state has. I can go on, but feel if every legislator thought about it they would see that it is cutting off the very hand that feeds their whole budget.
One last thing: the lawmakers love to get a law passed for taxes by saying all or a portion will help fund a related item, then in a few years slip that money to something else. Tolls/gas tax going to roads. Sweeps profits all to education. Rooms & Meals going toward tourism.
Think this through hard, good and worthy lawmakers!
Last Updated on Thursday, 23 April 2015 09:21
To The Daily Sun,
I want to continue my reply to a letter written by Mr. Meade to The Daily Sun on April 16.
I mentioned a article on page one of Union Leader on April 17 titled "Working and on welfare: N.H. Tops", which The Daily Sun printed on April 18. I wasn't surprised to see in April 23rd issue that Mr.Ewing was chosen by Mr Meade to respond to my comments. I would like to ask Mr. Meade: What jobs were created by the 1 percent (millionaires)? Who created jobs that made folks in New Hampshire — working jobs that pay liveable wages? Mr.Meade, how many folks do you think read the letters that your collection of parrots write, that you all insult on a daily basis? I'm talking about those folks who wait on you when you visit businesses in the Lake Region. I can't remember a cashier, waitress, fast-food worker and hundreds of other job holders ever writing a letter to the editor saying they are doing the best they can with the hand they were got.
To continue, Mr. Meade, the Laconia Citizen printed on April 20 an article: "More jobs but less food". The Hippo of April 16-22 (on page 6-7) wrote a great article on "Seasonal worker struggles" .
I think Lakes Region workers would enjoy a response from the Tea Party on this subject. I know the folks mentioned in these three articles working in less than liveable-wage jobs thank the writers of three articles. I can relate to this problem and will in another letter.
My last comment to make from Mr. Meade's April 16 letter, and I quote: "The Obama campaign raised more than $632 million during the 2012 election season,about 62 percent more (?) than Romney's $389 million; the Obama re-election team topped Romney's by 166 million. This was funny to see Mr. Meade write as he should have realized that more people wanted Obama to win. To be continuted.
Last Updated on Thursday, 23 April 2015 09:13
To The Daily Sun,
The emptiness of the theistic argument is front and center in the title of John Demakowski's latest letter. "Existence of supernatural world is all around: how did we get here?" There is no evidence because the natural world evidences itself, nothing more. Every time we dig, we find more natural explanations, processes and questions. Mr Demakowski's argument is the typical ages old "argument from ignorance"; the God of the Gaps argument. The appeal is, "well, golly, how did the big bang or life happen?". Well, we really don't know, do we? We may never know. But it sure is easy to appeal to people's ignorance with the hubris of pretending revelatory knowledge.
The history of knowledge is a story of an ever-shrinking space within which to say something is an act of God. We used to think thunder and lightning were some expression from the supernatural. Nobody in the sky is angry. The same is true of disease, insanity, pestilence, plague, infertility, famine, drought, crop failure, and mass murdering floods. The Bible is full of ludicrous claims about God using natural disasters to punish people. None of it had to to do with any God and so it may be with the entire universe.
Mr Demakowski claims, "God at His choosing allows His children to see into this supernatural realm through dreams and visions and less often actual experience in it". This was the belief of ancient and medieval times. There isn't any evidence that any of these experiences occurred for any other reason than neurologic ones. MRI brain scans can actually watch these experiences unfold and provide a degree of explanation. As we skeptics, say, its likely all in your head. In the past, we also thought things like voices, visions, and religious dreams originated in the supernatural world. Now we see they are neurologic in origin and if troubling enough can be treated medically. The same goes with some seizure disorders that exhibit blinding lights, temporary blindness, voices, and religious auras.
To say, "Yet the most full proof is the Holy Spirit living in believers' hearts" is absolute nonsense because believing something is not proof of anything. Such a claim is untestable and unverifiable. Mr Demakowski needs to look up the words faith, evidence, and proof in the dictionary. He clearly does not know their fundamental meanings. According to Pew Surveys, 7.5 million people lost their religion since 2012. People aren't buying what people bought in the past. Maybe theists can blame the Internet for breaking open the necessary closed information system of religion. Fully one-third of all Americans under 30 identify religiously as "nones". Two-thirds accept evolution. This is very good news to rationalists.
Last Updated on Thursday, 23 April 2015 09:04
To The Daily Sun,
On behalf of Lakes Region Community College and our Arts and Sciences Department, I would like to invite the public to hear our guest speaker, Colonel Donald Morrisey (USAF-Retired).
Don will be speaking in two of my history classes on Wednesday, April 29 about his experiences as a long-range nuclear bomber pilot during the Cold War and as a helicopter pilot in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam Conflict.
There will be two presentations. One starts at 9:30 a. m. and the other at 1:00 p. m. The event will be held in Room 200A in the Turner Building at the college.
Besides a long and distinguished career in the United States Air Force, Don served as vice president for Student Affairs for many years at our college. He regularly speaks at our Veterans Appreciation Day events and has talked out his military experiences with my classes on a number of occasions.
The public is invited to hear what will be excellent presentations.
Professor, History and Social Sciences
Lakes Region Community College
Last Updated on Thursday, 23 April 2015 09:00