First time visitor? Learn more.

Open Letter to U.N. Secretary General: Science Does Not Substantiate Your Global Warming Statements

by huckfunn ( 69 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Climate, Communism, Corruption, Democratic Party, Economy, Energy, Environmentalism, government, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Marxism, meteorology, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, Politics, Regulation, Socialism, taxation, Weather, World at December 2nd, 2012 - 10:02 am

 

World leaders and high government officials  around the world have gotten into the habit of making public pronouncements that every extreme weather event is the result of man made “global warming” or “climate change” despite the scientific facts to the contrary. Recently, U.N. Secretary Ban Ki-Moon made the following statements before the U.N. General Assembly:

 “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”

There’s been very little public push back against the Global Warming Hoax (GWH) as the compliant press has joined the GWH conspiracy to seize Western wealth by implementing confiscatory  carbon taxes and regulations. However, on November 29, 129 scientists (over half with PhD’s) published an open letter to the Secretary General challenging his unsubstantiated blatherings.

Mr. Secretary-General:

On November 9 this year you told the General Assembly: “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”

On November 13 you said at Yale: “The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”

The following day, in Al Gore’s “Dirty Weather” Webcast, you spoke of “more severe storms, harsher droughts, greater floods”, concluding: “Two weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy struck the eastern seaboard of the United States. A nation saw the reality of climate change. The recovery will cost tens of billions of dollars. The cost of inaction will be even higher. We must reduce our dependence on carbon emissions.”

We the undersigned, qualified in climate-related matters, wish to state that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate your assertions.

The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years. During this period, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations rose by nearly 9% to now constitute 0.039% of the atmosphere. Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years. Whether, when and how atmospheric warming will resume is unknown. The science is unclear. Some scientists point out that near-term natural cooling, linked to variations in solar output, is also a distinct possibility.

The “even larger climate shocks” you have mentioned would be worse if the world cooled than if it warmed. Climate changes naturally all the time, sometimes dramatically. The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence.

Read the entire article here. Hat tip – Climate Depot.

 

 

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

69 Responses to “Open Letter to U.N. Secretary General: Science Does Not Substantiate Your Global Warming Statements”
( jump to bottom )

  1. RIX
    1 | December 2, 2012 10:26 am

    Good morning. The AGW lobby (lot’s of money in it) and their
    acolytes accept the proposition on faith.
    It is not science or the case would by now be indisputable.
    If you propose to trash the economy & displace jobs, because
    of a threat that you perceive the onus is on you.
    Snarky mocking of people who don’t buy in is childish & it
    doesn’t advance their cause.


  2. 2 | December 2, 2012 10:30 am

    Actually, the snarky mocking has worked quite well to date.Solyndra, the Chevy Volt, etc.


  3. 3 | December 2, 2012 10:32 am

    18 years of global conferences, 16 years of no warming. Determined little bastards, aren’t they?


  4. eaglesoars
    4 | December 2, 2012 10:36 am

    There’s been very little public push back against the Global Warming Hoax (GWH) as the compliant press has joined the GWH conspiracy to seize Western wealth by implementing confiscatory carbon taxes and regulations.

    I think there has been some push back in the sense that fewer and fewer people (according to polls) think AGW is much of a problem. Which tells me they think it’s mostly BS

    As for seizing western wealth -- I think that is the means, not the end. I think the end is globalization. A lot of people just want to control the world.


  5. 5 | December 2, 2012 10:36 am

    @ Mike C.:

    I f the science doesn’t fit their narrative they’ll get new science. Hide the decline! Globalwarming, at least man-made global wartming is a hoax. If you believe the science (the same science that teaches us about evolution, I should like to add) the earth has never had a consistent climate. It has been both warmer and colder than it currently is, all of said changes happening before humanity became a factor. If there is climate change going on, it is far more likely (and consistent with the science) that the same forces that have caused climate change in the past are again at work. Those who deny this are denying deniers of science. Stone them!!


  6. huckfunn
    6 | December 2, 2012 10:40 am

    What blows my mind is that CA just this month implemented a cap & tax scheme that will only drive more businesses out of the state. Further, there was a CA referendum (this year I think) that postponed the tax portion of the scheme until after unemployment fell below 5 or 7%. The dumbasses VOTE AGAINST IT and instead voted for higher taxes. Schtoopid is as schtoopid does.


  7. eaglesoars
    7 | December 2, 2012 10:44 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    they’ll get new science.

    morning IF

    Methinks they’ll have to be more clever than they have been. Overreach has always been their downfall. See Michael Mann’s lawsuit (I think it’s defamation or something) against National Review -- in which he claims he is a Nobel laureate.

    He’s not. The prize was awarded to the IPCC of which he was a member.


  8. 8 | December 2, 2012 10:44 am

    Mike C. wrote:

    Actually, the snarky mocking has worked quite well to date.Solyndra, the Chevy Volt, etc.

    Speaking of which…I saw one in a parking lot yesterday. Some guy was putting his groceries in it, and I rolled down the car window and said “Look! It’s a Chevy DoltImeanVolt!”
    He laughed and replied “Yeah, it’s an Обамаmobile!” At least he had a sense of humor.


  9. 9 | December 2, 2012 10:47 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Morning! It is a lovely day.

    Isn’t it a crime to lie to the court in a complaint like that? I’d love to see that fuck go to jail for his crimes.


  10. eaglesoars
    10 | December 2, 2012 10:48 am

    huckfunn wrote:

    What blows my mind is that CA just this month implemented a cap & tax scheme that will only drive more businesses out of the state. Further, there was a CA referendum (this year I think) that postponed the tax portion of the scheme until after unemployment fell below 5 or 7%. The dumbasses VOTE AGAINST IT and instead voted for higher taxes. Schtoopid is as schtoopid does.

    We had a good discussion about this a week or two ago.

    Take the entire population of the state, all of it, children, inmates, etc. Now subtract everyone who works for a gov’t agency, be it at the local, state, federal level.

    What pops up is that only 37% of the population actually pays taxes. So it LOOKS like that vote was by people who thought, hey, ain’t my money they’ll be coming after -- and we get high speed rail out it.

    Not that the rail system is going anywhere they want to go………


  11. huckfunn
    11 | December 2, 2012 10:48 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Stone them!!

    Here’s what Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-ipshit) had to say about global warming this past week:

    “There is a new normal of new extremes and we have to be prepared for it,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said. “And the reason we have this new normal of new extremes is because global climate change is happening and is real. And we’ve tolerated the deniers for far too long in this body.


  12. 12 | December 2, 2012 10:49 am

    No scientific fact here, just an observation. Having spent more than my share of time at 30K+ feet while working for an airline, what always amazed me is just how insignificant man’s accomplishments appear from that altitude. Yeah, there are exceptions like the Hoover dam and some major cites, but by and large, evidence of man is pretty sparse over much of the continent.

    I think man would be hard-pressed to permanently alter the climate, even of we tried.


  13. eaglesoars
    13 | December 2, 2012 10:51 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ eaglesoars:

    Morning! It is a lovely day.

    Isn’t it a crime to lie to the court in a complaint like that? I’d love to see that fuck go to jail for his crimes.

    I don’t think anything has actually been filed. Nor will it be. There is no case. He’s just posturing w/a lawyer probably paid for by PSU so he can strut his stuff in public….YEAH I’M SUING THOSE BASTARDS!!

    Needless to say, National Review has rarely been so entertained.


  14. huckfunn
    14 | December 2, 2012 10:55 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    We had a good discussion about this a week or two ago.

    Take the entire population of the state, all of it, children, inmates, etc. Now subtract everyone who works for a gov’t agency, be it at the local, state, federal level.

    What pops up is that only 37% of the population actually pays taxes. So it LOOKS like that vote was by people who thought, hey, ain’t my money they’ll be coming after — and we get high speed rail out it.

    Not that the rail system is going anywhere they want to go………

    California is the calculated to be the worst run state in the union.


  15. buzzsawmonkey
    15 | December 2, 2012 10:57 am

    It’s not “cap and tax,” it’s “capon tax”—because those advocating it want to cut the balls off the Western economy.


  16. 16 | December 2, 2012 10:59 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    I think man would be hard-pressed to permanently alter the climate, even of we tried.

    An all-out global thrermonuclear war might temporarily alter the earth’s climate, but the world would recover. Nothing short of that is going to do anything significant. The purveyors of the Global Warming Hoax aren’t really concerned with polution. That’s why they have no problem riding in their private jets to Global Warming conferences in exotic locations.


  17. 17 | December 2, 2012 11:00 am

    @ huckfunn:

    Better watch it. Dorian Grey will go nuts on you for pointing out the obvious about California.


  18. lobo91
    18 | December 2, 2012 11:01 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ huckfunn:

    Better watch it. Dorian Grey will go nuts on you for pointing out the obvious about California.

    It’s obviously the fault of all those Harvard grads from Tennessee who moved out there and took over the state, anyway…
    //


  19. huckfunn
    19 | December 2, 2012 11:03 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ huckfunn:

    Better watch it. Dorian Grey will go nuts on you for pointing out the obvious about California.

    Heh. I intentionally deleted all references to DG before posting. I value the semi-serenity of my Sabbath.


  20. eaglesoars
    20 | December 2, 2012 11:09 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    An all-out global thrermonuclear war might temporarily alter the earth’s climate

    Leave it to you to think of that one.

    Nothing short of that is going to do anything significant.

    not sure that’s the case. there has been some significant volcanic activity that has altered global climate.

    The 10 biggies

    @ huckfunn:

    That is a very strange table. I’m not disputing California, but how on earth can Vermont rank at #8 with those numbers? 31.3% budget shortfall? Puh-leeze


  21. lobo91
    21 | December 2, 2012 11:15 am

    Speaking of California:

    Chinese ‘maternity hotel’ sparks outrage in California suburb

    Residents of a Southern California suburb are protesting against a hilltop home that they say serves as a maternity center for Chinese mothers paying thousands of dollars to give birth to so-called “anchor babies.”

    Dozens picketed a Chino Hills intersection on Saturday, holding signs that read “No Birth Tourism” and “Not Here! Not in USA!”

    The city’s mayor tells the San Bernardino Sun that rooms in the house have been rented out to pregnant Chinese women until they give birth.


  22. eaglesoars
    22 | December 2, 2012 11:18 am

    Public masturbation is illegal right?

    Reliable Sources in talking about the ‘new era’ at CNN under the auspices of their new boss, Zucker. He’s going to bring in ‘more energetic’ programming.

    and IT’S GOING TO BE GREAT AND EVERYONE WILL BE IN AWE AND FOX IS A FOUR LETTER WORD

    yawn


  23. huckfunn
    23 | December 2, 2012 11:18 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    That is a very strange table. I’m not disputing California, but how on earth can Vermont rank at #8 with those numbers? 31.3% budget shortfall? Puh-leeze

    Some quirk in the data. Dunno?


  24. 24 | December 2, 2012 11:18 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    not sure that’s the case. there has been some significant volcanic activity that has altered global climate.

    Yeah, but that’s not man made. Therein is the problem. We might could, if we tried hard enough, temporarily change the climate, but it would require a lot of effort, and it would be temproary. Running our cars just isn’t doing it at all, and won’t. They are trying to classify CO2, which plants require to live, as a pollutant. This is insane.


  25. Calo
    25 | December 2, 2012 11:20 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Dorian Grey‏@doriangrey_grey

    @Carolina_Girl3 @dolphincatcher I know our state has problems, but damn the outright California hate just wears me down.


  26. eaglesoars
    26 | December 2, 2012 11:22 am

    @ lobo91:

    That’s been going on in NYC for years. I suspect also in other ‘main’ cities -- Chicago, Miami, Wash DC. If someone wanted to look at airline schedules to major US cities from China, it might be interesting.


  27. huckfunn
    27 | December 2, 2012 11:23 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    They are trying to classify CO2, which plants require to live, as a pollutant.

    They’ve gone well beyond trying. The EPA has done it.


  28. eaglesoars
    28 | December 2, 2012 11:23 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Yeah, but that’s not man made

    d’uh.

    i’m not a morning person.

    Reliable Sources is playing the Susan Rice race card.


  29. eaglesoars
    29 | December 2, 2012 11:26 am

    huckfunn wrote:

    They’ve gone well beyond trying. The EPA has done it.

    Hubby and I have been watching the whole fracking business. I think the EPA will try to shut it down -- so does he -- but I think at that point we’ll start seeing some civil disobediance.

    *fingers crossed*


  30. 30 | December 2, 2012 11:30 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I’m reminded of the Mt Pinatubo eruption that made circles of ash and “greenhouse gasses” that circled the Earth and was strikingly visible from space. It was said that single eruption equalled all of the man-made pollution since the beginning of history…combined. Any long-term damage? I don’t think so.

    Man-made climate change is the adult version of the bogey man, a tale to force behavioral change in accordance with a larger agenda.


  31. lobo91
    31 | December 2, 2012 11:33 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Man-made climate change is the adult version of the bogey man, a tale to force behavioral change in accordance with a larger agenda.

    The fact that it’s driven by an agenda, rather than science, is obvious when you look at which countries they exempt from their proposed regulations.

    If they were really trying to reduce the emission of these evil greenhouse gases, would they exempt China and India? Obviously not.


  32. 32 | December 2, 2012 11:36 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    When I hear of hard-hitting investigative journalism directed at the Democrats in general and the Administration in particular, perhaps I’ll take the initiative to find out what channel CNN occupies on DirecTV.

    To say “I’m not holding my breath” is my submission for Understatement of the Day.


  33. huckfunn
    33 | December 2, 2012 11:37 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    huckfunn wrote:

    They’ve gone well beyond trying. The EPA has done it.

    Hubby and I have been watching the whole fracking business. I think the EPA will try to shut it down — so does he — but I think at that point we’ll start seeing some civil disobediance.

    *fingers crossed*

    They’ve been trying to shut fraccing (the root word being “fracture”) down for years. Earlier this year EPA finally dropped their lawsuit against Range Resources when their allegations of groundwater contamination was proven false.


  34. 34 | December 2, 2012 11:41 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    If they were really trying to reduce the emission of these evil greenhouse gases, would they exempt China and India? Obviously not.

    Remember the media’s faction to the enormous layer of smog over Beijing during the Olympics, smog so bad that the athletes were concerned for their health? Sure, it was reported (even they couldn’t absolutely ignore it), but it was extremely muted.


  35. Bumr50
    35 | December 2, 2012 11:42 am

    @ huckfunn:

    Some people believe ‘Gasland’ to be factually accurate.

    I work with a few.


  36. mawskrat
    36 | December 2, 2012 11:43 am

    ha ha…watching a movie on SyFy…global warming>LOL

    aliens global warming…the sky is falling


  37. 37 | December 2, 2012 11:43 am

    @ MacDuff:

    uh, “faction” = reaction. :|


  38. lobo91
    38 | December 2, 2012 11:44 am

    @ MacDuff:

    One of the more interesting stories I remember hearing on BBC radio when I was in Kuwait last year was a controversy over the US Embassy in Beijing posting air quality information on its website. As you might expect, the figures they posted were often at odds with the Chinese government’s figures. They were demanding that the embassy stop posting the true figures.


  39. lobo91
    39 | December 2, 2012 11:49 am

    mawskrat wrote:

    ha ha…watching a movie on SyFy…global warming>LOL

    aliens global warming…the sky is falling

    The most ridiculous thing I ever watched was The Day After Tomorrow.

    One of the more unintentionally amusing parts was when Dennis Quaid, playing some big climate expert, testifies in front of Congress that there’s going to be some sort of massive climate disaster sometime in the next 10 or 15 years, or some such timeframe.

    The big disaster then happens like a week later.

    Seems to me that pretty much showed how worthless their predictions are, rather than what the film’s producers intended to show.


  40. buzzsawmonkey
    40 | December 2, 2012 11:53 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Public masturbation is illegal right?

    When the sun goes down, the pervs come out
    Gather in the alleyways and all begin to shout,
    “Hey, hey—listen, Bud
    It’s a treat to beat your meat
    To choke your chicken
    Pound your pud
    It’s a treat to beat your meat
    To choke your chicken
    Pound your pud…”


  41. huckfunn
    41 | December 2, 2012 11:56 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    @ huckfunn:

    Some people believe ‘Gasland’ to be factually accurate.

    I work with a few.

    America’s Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA) has published the facts that directly refeut the Gasland flatulence. Be sure and share that with yer co-workers.


  42. 42 | December 2, 2012 11:59 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    “Another one Pounds the Pud….”


  43. lobo91
    43 | December 2, 2012 12:00 pm

    @ huckfunn:

    “Facts”?

    I think that’s another word that’s been declared racist.


  44. huckfunn
    44 | December 2, 2012 12:04 pm

    @ lobo91:
    Indeed! I just saw this over at NewsMax.
    GOP Reps: Fracking Study Puts Oil Jobs in Peril
    It seems that HHS and CDC are trying to get in on the anti fraccing action.

    Several Republican members of the House expressed concerned in a letter Friday that a federal study into the environmental effects of fracking could put oil and gas industry jobs in jeopardy.

    Members of energy and health committees sent the letter to Health and Human Sservices Director Kathleen Sebelius saying that if the study is not conducted fairly it could negatively impact the key industry.

    The Centers for Disease Control may begin a study into reports that fracking — a method of extracting gas by pumping a high-pressure solution of water, sand and chemicals into underground rock formations to free up stores of shale gas — could pollute drinking water.

    “Despite the significant growth of natural gas development, we are greatly concerned that the scientific objectivity of the Department of Health and Human Services is being subverted and countless jobs could be in jeopardy,” lawmakers said in the letter.

    Five Republicans congressmen signed the letter. They are House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton of Michigan; three subcommittee chairmen, Ed Whitfield, of Kentucky, Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania, and John Shimkus of Illinois; and past committee chairman Joe Barton of Texas.

    If the studies identify naturally occurring chemicals in water as contaminants, new restrictions have the potential to put the brakes on a booming industry.

    “We urge you to consult to state regulatory and public health officials who have much deeper experience monitoring the effects of hydraulic fracking than most federal officials have,” the congressmen wrote.


  45. eaglesoars
    45 | December 2, 2012 12:05 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    When the sun goes down, the pervs come out
    Gather in the alleyways and all begin to shout,
    “Hey, hey—listen, Bud
    It’s a treat to beat your meat
    To choke your chicken
    Pound your pud
    It’s a treat to beat your meat
    To choke your chicken
    Pound your pud…”

    good god. Do you have children?

    Please say no


  46. buzzsawmonkey
    46 | December 2, 2012 12:11 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    good god. Do you have children?

    Please say no

    Are you afraid I will pass on my gift?


  47. eaglesoars
    47 | December 2, 2012 12:12 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    If the studies identify naturally occurring chemicals in water as contaminants

    what a load of crap.

    methane occurs naturally (IIRC there are 3 variants -- thermmogenic, biogenic and something else -- it’s been awhile)

    I grew up in SW Penna -- think coal/steel -- and anyone who grows up in a similar regions knows this.

    Seriously. Sometimes I think people need to be moved out of cities into tents on the prairie and watch them learn to fend.

    A 10 day Outward Bound expedition probably wouldn’t hurt.


  48. eaglesoars
    48 | December 2, 2012 12:13 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    eaglesoars wrote:

    good god. Do you have children?

    Please say no

    Are you afraid I will pass on my gift?

    ‘Afraid’?

    No. I’m fucking terrified.


  49. huckfunn
    49 | December 2, 2012 12:14 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    I grew up in SW Penna

    Where in SW PA? I lived in Enon Valley, Beaver County until I was 10 and then we moved to Nashville, TN.


  50. lobo91
    50 | December 2, 2012 12:18 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    I remember when the EPA was messing around with the arsenic standard for drinking water back in the late ’90s. They were going to change it to an extent that the drinking water in Albuquerque would have been in violation. The city was looking at having to build some sort of exorbitantly expensive plant to remove the arsenic--which is naturally occuring--from the water.

    One thing that I thought was interesting about the whole debate was the fact that those pushing the new standard, which was supposed to prevent some sort of cancer, as I recall, failed to notice that the residents of Albuquerque didn’t exhibit any higher incidence of this particular disease than the rest of the country.

    You would think that would disprove their whole claim.


  51. buzzsawmonkey
    51 | December 2, 2012 12:21 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    You would think that would disprove their whole claim.

    Facts? They don’t need no steenkin’ facts.


  52. eaglesoars
    52 | December 2, 2012 12:22 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    Where in SW PA? I lived in Enon Valley, Beaver County until I was 10 and then we moved to Nashville, TN.

    I was born in a tiny little town -- Uniontown -- that nobody ever heard of unless they happen to stumble over the fact that is where Gen. Geo. Marshall was born. Right down the road to go up the mountain is a hamlet called Hopwood which is where we lived. The foothills of Appalachia. I went to school with kids who lived in tarpaper shacks and sometimes even had shoes. My father’s side of the family worked in the mines. Dad escaped.

    We moved to Pittsburgh when I was 10 and I consider myself a ‘yinzer’.


  53. lobo91
    53 | December 2, 2012 12:23 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    I really like the recent trend in “period” movies and TV shows of trying to portray the environment more realistically. The railroad camp in Hell on Wheels, for example, doesn’t really look like a place I’d like to live, with the mud, raw sewage, flies, etc.

    Most of today’s greenies have no idea what things were like even 80-100 years ago, and how much better they are now.


  54. eaglesoars
    54 | December 2, 2012 12:27 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    I remember when the EPA was messing around with the arsenic standard for drinking water back in the late ’90s.

    Oh yeah I remember that too. Did you catch the totally bogus panic they tried to gin up over arsenic in RICE? Did you catch how fast that just disappeared?

    I would have LOVED to be a fly on the wall when the rice lobbying guys got out their hammers. I’ve seen the sugar guys at work, but man, I’ll bet this one was bloody.


  55. huckfunn
    55 | December 2, 2012 12:31 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    One thing that I thought was interesting about the whole debate was the fact that those pushing the new standard, which was supposed to prevent some sort of cancer, as I recall, failed to notice that the residents of Albuquerque didn’t exhibit any higher incidence of this particular disease than the rest of the country.

    You would think that would disprove their whole claim.

    There was a similar situation in Colorado about 25 years ago. Aspen, I think. The EPA did some soil sampling around town and arrived at the conclusion that virtually all of the soil in the town needed to be remediated due to lead contamination. The goofy thing was that people who had lived there all of their lives had lead levels in their blood that were normal and well below what could be considered toxic. I think the City told the EPA to piss off and they went away.


  56. lobo91
    56 | December 2, 2012 12:36 pm

    @ huckfunn:

    There have been similar studies related to lead shot. There have been all sorts of bogus claims that the use of lead shot causes elevated lead levels in game animals, and thus in people who eat the animals.

    Unfortunately for them, nobody’s ever actually detected these elevated lead levels in humans, even in people who live primarily off of hunting.

    That inconvenient fact hasn’t stopped them from pushing to outlaw lead shot, of course. They just “know” that it’s bad.


  57. eaglesoars
    57 | December 2, 2012 12:36 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    The railroad camp in Hell on Wheels

    I’ve seen ads for that show and keep trying to find it but keep missing it. I like period shows too -- Downton Abbey, etc.

    I’m not sure Falling Skies fits the genre but I loved it.


  58. huckfunn
    58 | December 2, 2012 12:37 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    I was born in a tiny little town — Uniontown

    Now I remember you mentioning Uniontown. Quite a few peeps here from the yinzer neck of the woods.


  59. 59 | December 2, 2012 12:38 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ eaglesoars:

    I really like the recent trend in “period” movies and TV shows of trying to portray the environment more realistically. The railroad camp in Hell on Wheels, for example, doesn’t really look like a place I’d like to live, with the mud, raw sewage, flies, etc.

    Most of today’s greenies have no idea what things were like even 80-100 years ago, and how much better they are now.

    The past was surely an incredibly smelly place, even at it’s best. I’ve no doubt that even the homes of the rich would be highly offensive to our 21st Century American noses.


  60. eaglesoars
    60 | December 2, 2012 12:40 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    There have been similar studies related to lead shot. There have been all sorts of bogus claims that the use of lead shot causes elevated lead levels in game animals, and thus in people who eat the animals

    I think Iron Fist is the go-to guy for that -- he’s probably been following it more closely than anyone I know. That particular argument is not really about lead -- it’s a gun grab.

    NRA has been on it, as you might expect.


  61. lobo91
    61 | December 2, 2012 12:43 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:

    The railroad camp in Hell on Wheels

    I’ve seen ads for that show and keep trying to find it but keep missing it. I like period shows too — Downton Abbey, etc.

    I’m not sure Falling Skies fits the genre but I loved it.

    It’s on AMC. Season one is on DVD.


  62. huckfunn
    62 | December 2, 2012 12:44 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ huckfunn:

    There have been similar studies related to lead shot. There have been all sorts of bogus claims that the use of lead shot causes elevated lead levels in game animals, and thus in people who eat the animals.

    Unfortunately for them, nobody’s ever actually detected these elevated lead levels in humans, even in people who live primarily off of hunting.

    That inconvenient fact hasn’t stopped them from pushing to outlaw lead shot, of course. They just “know” that it’s bad.

    There is a piece of pending legislation that addresses that issue. You’re probably aware of it, but for those who aren’t, here it is. You Must Act Now to Stop the EPA from Regulating Your Ammunition


  63. eaglesoars
    63 | December 2, 2012 12:44 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Thanks!

    gotta go. I’m supposed to learn about REITs

    *groan*


  64. whosoever
    64 | December 2, 2012 12:45 pm

    @ eaglesoars:
    Loretta? Is that you?


  65. Buffalobob
    65 | December 2, 2012 12:50 pm

    We know the AGW scam is all about the redistribution of money, they know that AGW is all about the redistribution of money.


  66. lobo91
    66 | December 2, 2012 12:50 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    There’s an ulterior motive behind most of these “scientific” scares.

    There’s been a less successful effort to ban lead rifle and pistol ammo, as well. That one’s not doing as well, since it’s pretty easy to demonstrate that lead-free bullets basically don’t work well.

    The military has actually gone to lead-free ammo, though.


  67. John Difool
    67 | December 2, 2012 12:56 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    @ huckfunn:
    There have been similar studies related to lead shot. There have been all sorts of bogus claims that the use of lead shot causes elevated lead levels in game animals, and thus in people who eat the animals.
    Unfortunately for them, nobody’s ever actually detected these elevated lead levels in humans, even in people who live primarily off of hunting.
    That inconvenient fact hasn’t stopped them from pushing to outlaw lead shot, of course. They just “know” that it’s bad.

    There is a piece of pending legislation that addresses that issue. You’re probably aware of it, but for those who aren’t, here it is. You Must Act Now to Stop the EPA from Regulating Your Ammunition

    A few years ago the Dept. of Defense had been buying up shitloads of brass & the available used .223 casings & the Fed had been buying up all of the .40 casings putting ammo for those two rounds in short supply & causing the prices to skyrocket for available ammo.

    Why? Because they are the two most popular rounds for the citizenry. It was no accident.


  68. huckfunn
    68 | December 2, 2012 1:05 pm

    John Difool wrote:

    A few years ago the Dept. of Defense had been buying up shitloads of brass & the available used .223 casings & the Fed had been buying up all of the .40 casings putting ammo for those two rounds in short supply & causing the prices to skyrocket for available ammo.

    Why? Because they are the two most popular rounds for the citizenry. It was no accident.

    Yep. That was about 4 years ago (just about the time Obatomy was elected)and you couldn’t get a box of .223 or 9mm for anything. I think the industry responded by cranking out lots more. At any rate, I’m pretty well set for those specific rounds and .45 for a long time.


  69. John Difool
    69 | December 2, 2012 1:12 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    John Difool wrote:
    A few years ago the Dept. of Defense had been buying up shitloads of brass & the available used .223 casings & the Fed had been buying up all of the .40 casings putting ammo for those two rounds in short supply & causing the prices to skyrocket for available ammo.
    Why? Because they are the two most popular rounds for the citizenry. It was no accident.
    Yep. That was about 4 years ago (just about the time Obatomy was elected)and you couldn’t get a box of .223 or 9mm for anything. I think the industry responded by cranking out lots more. At any rate, I’m pretty well set for those specific rounds and .45 for a long time.

    I believe it was a trial balloon or a dry run by Oba’Mao’s Fed to see how it could affect the ammo industry & the populace. You literally could not find a box of .223 or .40 anywhere for weeks, if you did it wasn’t on the shelf long & cost about a third sometimes almost twice as much more.

    Can’t take their guns away? Take their ammo away.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David