I'll Tell You What Happened...

I read What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception by Scott McClellan, the former White House press secretary. When the book was released, current and former members of the Bush administration called it the whinings of a disgruntled former employee. Having read the book, I don't think that is the case at all.

As we all heard in the news when the book came out, Scott McClellan calls the war in Iraq unnecessary, the Bush administration not completely honest, and the press irresponsible. He says his faith in God drove him to write the book. If you don't remember the sound bytes and newspaper quotes, I refer you to the first chapter of the book to refresh your memory. No surprise that that is what made the news. When news of the book broke, I don't imagine anyone read the whole thing first. Having finished the book, that fact is plainly obvious to me.

What Scott McClellan provides the reader in What Happened is a summary of the history of George W. Bush and his administration starting with its formation while Bush was governor of Texas, through the campaign and the first five years of the Bush Dynasty Part II up until Scott McClellan resigned as Press Secretary on April 26, 2006. Nothing in the book is anything we haven't already heard. It is an alternate perspective on the news out of Washington from 2001 to 2006. While billed as a “tell-all” narrative of the happenings in the White House, not much of the behind-the-scenes dirt makes it into the book because I don't believe Scott McClellan was privy to that much that he didn't already tell the White House Press Corps.

Throughout the book, Scott McClellan refers to the “permanent campaign,” whereby the president and his aides operate the government in the same way they operated the run for the presidency. Instead of governing and upholding the campaign promises of bipartisanship and “cleaning up Washington,” the Bush administration has spent the last eight years deeply entrenched in a campaign to manipulate public opinion and to market and sell radical policy (I paraphrase). Scott McClellan blames Richard Nixon's administration for creating the permanent campaign, and he blames the Clinton administration for perpetuating it, legitimizing it and allowing it to become what it was by 2001. Finally, he blames George W. Bush and his administration for not doing anything to fix it. Scott McClellan appears to understand that he was part of the problem. He wants his book to be part of the solution.

Scott McClellan concludes his narrative by making a series of suggestions for alleviating the political influence over public policy. The primary idea that he proposes is to create a position in the senior White House staff to oversee executive honesty (I paraphrase). McClellan's idealistic approach sounds great to me, but frankly I find that oxymoron as hilarious as you do. I think ending the book was the main purpose of his conclusions. Let's draw our own conclusions with this new plethora of information on the Bush administration and the last eight years of United States History.

First, the American people got sold a bill of goods when we got convinced that we needed to go to war in Iraq. I could have told you that in 2003. Some tried to, but the Bush administration did everything it could to make sure no one listened. The whole Valerie Plame situation was orchestrated by the Bush administration to shut Joseph Wilson up when he tried to tell us that.

Second, Scott McClellan was right. The media is irresponsible. Most of the nincompoops in this country would rather see “Real World: The White House” rather than actually understand what is going on in our government, which would love to run your life for you if you'll let it. Since that's what sells ads for penis drugs and something they call beer, that's what we get, which does a severe disservice to the American people, and indeed the world. Now, people are protesting and screaming “Oh my God! You can't let those gay homosexuals get married!” when they should be crying out “Holy shit! We're holding a country under siege for its oil and its strategic location next door to Iran, a country that would like a more efficient and less polluting source of power. And a bomb, probably."

Third, George W. Bush is in over his head, and has been the entire time he has occupied the White House. It's not that he's stupid. He's not. It's just that he's incompetent. Bush was a good governor in Texas. The Texans loved him. The United States of America is not Texas. Everything is not big in the United States of America. Especially the fine print, which, as it turns out, is monstrous.

Global Climate Change: Part One of a Probably Endless Series

On account of several excuses I could now give, but mostly just because I didn't get around to writing a column this time around, I'm going to kick off the climate change topic, a topic which I will definitely revisit, and probably more than once, by reprinting an article that was forwarded to me which provides a point of view on the subject.

Before we get to that, though, I want to mention three points about climate change and “Global Warming” that I believe need to be addressed prior to engaging in discourse and debate on the subject.

First, “Global Warming” is a media buzzword. What “Global Warming” refers to is global average temperature change. This happens on occasion, and has done so since the Earth formed, or God created it, however you want to look at it.

Second, a nice day, or even a whole week of them in February is not evidence of global average temperature change, nor is it caused by it. This happens on occasion, and has done so since the Earth formed, or God created it, however you want to look at it.

Third, and finally, “Global Warming” is a political issue, while global average temperature change is a scientific one. There is a communication breakdown between the political community and the scientific community. The media follows the political community, so all the general public hears about is “Oh No! Global Warming!” with no real good idea of what that is. I'll bet the average American who claims to have an opinion on “Global Warming” couldn't give you one scientific fact about the topic, and has no idea what global average temperature change even means.

Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, makes a few interesting points. Before I can really comment in detail, I'd have to watch the film again. But with one watching about a year ago, I can tell you this: Al Gore is a politician. He has a degree in government and some graduate study in divinity and law. That being said, his science, sound as it may be, but mostly his conclusions must be viewed with a skeptical eye and taken with a grain of salt. Scientific integrity and political manipulation tend to be mutually exclusive. Ask any current or former director of the US Public Health Service about what happens when politicians get their hands on science.

Al Gore presents one point of view. Without further ado, here's another point of view. John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel, delivered these comments before the San Diego Chamber of Commerce on June 13, 2008. Text quoted below, thanks to Marilyn Jackson for sending this along to me.

Global Warming and the Price of a Gallon of Gas

by John Coleman

You may want to give credit where credit is due to Al Gore and his global warming campaign the next time you fill your car with gasoline, because there is a direct connection between Global Warming and four dollar a gallon gas. It is shocking, but true, to learn that the entire Global Warming frenzy is based on the environmentalist’s attack on fossil fuels, particularly gasoline. All this big time science, international meetings, thick research papers, dire threats for the future; all of it, comes down to their claim that the carbon dioxide in the exhaust from your car and in the smoke stacks from our power plants is destroying the climate of planet Earth. What an amazing fraud; what a scam.

The future of our civilization lies in the balance.

That’s the battle cry of the High Priest of Global Warming Al Gore and his fellow, agenda driven disciples as they predict a calamitous outcome from anthropogenic global warming. According to Mr. Gore the polar ice caps will collapse and melt and sea levels will rise 20 feet inundating the coastal cities making 100 million of us refugees. Vice President Gore tells us numerous Pacific islands will be totally submerged and uninhabitable. He tells us global warming will disrupt the circulation of the ocean waters, dramatically changing climates, throwing the world food supply into chaos. He tells us global warming will turn hurricanes into super storms, produce droughts, wipe out the polar bears and result in bleaching of coral reefs. He tells us tropical diseases will spread to mid latitudes and heat waves will kill tens of thousands. He preaches to us that we must change our lives and eliminate fossil fuels or face the dire consequences. The future of our civilization is in the balance.

With a preacher’s zeal, Mr. Gore sets out to strike terror into us and our children and make us feel we are all complicit in the potential demise of the planet.

Here is my rebuttal.

There is no significant man made global warming. There has not been any in the past, there is none now and there is no reason to fear any in the future. The climate of Earth is changing. It has always changed. But mankind’s activities have not overwhelmed or significantly modified the natural forces.

Through all history, Earth has shifted between two basic climate regimes: ice ages and what paleoclimatologists call “Interglacial periods”. For the past 10 thousand years the Earth has been in an interglacial period. That might well be called nature’s global warming because what happens during an interglacial period is the Earth warms up, the glaciers melt and life flourishes. Clearly from our point of view, an interglacial period is greatly preferred to the deadly rigors of an ice age. Mr. Gore and his crowd would have us believe that the activities of man have overwhelmed nature during this interglacial period and are producing an unprecedented, out of control warming.

Well, it is simply not happening. Worldwide there was a significant natural warming trend in the 1980’s and 1990’s as a Solar cycle peaked with lots of sunspots and solar flares. That ended in 1998 and now the Sun has gone quiet with fewer and fewer Sun spots, and the global temperatures have gone into decline. Earth has cooled for almost ten straight years. So, I ask Al Gore, where’s the global warming?

The cooling trend is so strong that recently the head of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had to acknowledge it. He speculated that nature has temporarily overwhelmed mankind’s warming and it may be ten years or so before the warming returns. Oh, really. We are supposed to be in a panic about man-made global warming and the whole thing takes a ten year break because of the lack of Sun spots. If this weren’t so serious, it would be laughable.

Now allow me to talk a little about the science behind the global warming frenzy. I have dug through thousands of pages of research papers, including the voluminous documents published by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I have worked my way through complicated math and complex theories. Here’s the bottom line: the entire global warming scientific case is based on the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the use of fossil fuels. They don’t have any other issue. Carbon Dioxide, that’s it.

Hello Al Gore; Hello UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Your science is flawed; your hypothesis is wrong; your data is manipulated. And, may I add, your scare tactics are deplorable. The Earth does not have a fever. Carbon dioxide does not cause significant global warming.

The focus on atmospheric carbon dioxide grew out a study by Roger Revelle who was an esteemed scientist at the Scripps Oceanographic Institute. He took his research with him when he moved to Harvard and allowed his students to help him process the data for his paper. One of those students was Al Gore. That is where Gore got caught up in this global warming frenzy. Revelle’s paper linked the increases in carbon dioxide, CO2, in the atmosphere with warming. It labeled CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

Charles Keeling, another researcher at the Scripps Oceanographic Institute, set up a system to make continuous CO2 measurements. His graph of these increases has now become known as the Keeling Curve. When Charles Keeling died in 2005, his son Ralph, also at Scripps, took over the measurements. Here is what the Keeling curve shows: an increase in CO2 from 315 parts per million in 1958 to 385 parts per million today, an increase of 70 parts per million or about 20 percent.

All the computer models, all of the other findings, all of the other angles of study, all come back to and are based on CO2 as a significant greenhouse gas. It is not.

Here is the deal about CO2, carbon dioxide. It is a natural component of our atmosphere. It has been there since time began. It is absorbed and emitted by the oceans. It is used by every living plant to trigger photosynthesis. Nothing would be green without it. And we humans; we create it. Every time we breathe out, we emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It is not a pollutant. It is not smog. It is a naturally occurring invisible gas.

Let me illustrate. I estimate that this square in front of my face contains 100,000 molecules of atmosphere. Of those 100,000 only 38 are CO2; 38 out of a hundred thousand. That makes it a trace component. Let me ask a key question: how can this tiny trace upset the entire balance of the climate of Earth? It can’t. That’s all there is to it; it can’t.

The UN IPCC has attracted billions of dollars for the research to try to make the case that CO2 is the culprit of run-away, man-made global warming. The scientists have come up with very complex creative theories and done elaborate calculations and run computer models they say prove those theories. They present us with a concept they call radiative forcing. The research organizations and scientists who are making a career out of this theory, keep cranking out the research papers. Then the IPCC puts on big conferences at exotic places, such as the recent conference in Bali. The scientists endorse each other’s papers, they are summarized and voted on, and voila, we are told global warming is going to kill us all unless we stop burning fossil fuels.

May I stop here for a few historical notes? First, the internal combustion engine and gasoline were awful polluters when they were first invented. And, both gasoline and automobile engines continued to leave a layer of smog behind right up through the 1960’s. Then science and engineering came to the environmental rescue. Better exhaust and ignition systems, catalytic converters, fuel injectors, better engineering throughout the engine and reformulated gasoline have all contributed to a huge reduction in the exhaust emissions from today’s cars. Their goal then was to only exhaust carbon dioxide and water vapor, two gases widely accepted as natural and totally harmless. Anyone old enough to remember the pall of smog that used to hang over all our cities knows how much improvement there has been. So the environmentalists, in their battle against fossil fuels and automobiles had a very good point forty years ago, but now they have to focus almost entirely on the once harmless carbon dioxide. And, that is the rub. Carbon dioxide is not an environmental problem; they just want you now to think it is.

Numerous independent research projects have been done about the greenhouse impact from increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. These studies have proven to my total satisfaction that CO2 is not creating a major greenhouse effect and is not causing an increase in temperatures. By the way, before his death, Roger Revelle coauthored a paper cautioning that CO2 and its greenhouse effect did not warrant extreme countermeasures.

So how has the entire global warming frenzy with all its predictions of dire consequences, become so widely believed, accepted and regarded as a real threat to planet Earth? That is the most amazing part of the story.

So now it has come down to an intense campaign, orchestrated by environmentalists claiming that the burning of fossil fuels dooms the planet to run-away global warming. Ladies and Gentlemen, that is a myth.

To start with global warming has the backing of the United Nations, a major world force. Second, it has the backing of a former Vice President and very popular political figure. Third it has the endorsement of Hollywood, and that’s enough for millions. And, fourth, the environmentalists love global warming. It is their tool to combat fossil fuels. So with the environmentalists, the UN, Gore and Hollywood touting Global Warming and predictions of doom and gloom, the media has scrambled with excitement to climb aboard. After all the media loves a crisis. From Y2K to killer bees the media just loves to tell us our lives are threatened. And the media is biased toward liberal, so it’s pre-programmed to support Al Gore and UN. CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The LA Times, The Washington Post, the Associated Press and here in San Diego The Union Tribune are all constantly promoting the global warming crisis.

So who is going to go against all of that power? Not the politicians. So now the President of the United States, just about every Governor, most Senators and most Congress people, both of the major current candidates for President, most other elected officials on all levels of government are all riding the Al Gore Global Warming express. That is one crowded bus.

I suspect you haven’t heard it because the mass media did not report it, but I am not alone on the no man-made warming side of this issue. On May 20th, a list of the names of over thirty-one thousand scientists who refute global warming was released. Thirty-one thousand of which 9,000 are Ph.D's. Think about that. Thirty-one thousand. That dwarfs the supposed 2,500 scientists on the UN panel. In the past year, five hundred of scientists have issued public statements challenging global warming. A few more join the chorus every week. There are about 100 defectors from the UN IPCC. There was an International Conference of Climate Change Skeptics in New York in March of this year. One hundred of us gave presentations. Attendance was limited to six hundred people. Every seat was taken. There are a half dozen excellent internet sites that debunk global warming. And, thank goodness for KUSI and Michael McKinnon, its owner. He allows me to post my comments on global warming on the website KUSI.com. Following the publicity of my position from Fox News, Glen Beck on CNN, Rush Limbaugh and a host of other interviews, thousands of people come to the website and read my comments. I get hundreds of supportive emails from them. No I am not alone and the debate is not over.

In my remarks in New York I speculated that perhaps we should sue Al Gore for fraud because of his carbon credits trading scheme. That remark has caused a stir in the fringe media and on the internet. The concept is that if the media won’t give us a hearing and the other side will not debate us, perhaps we could use a Court of law to present our papers and our research and if the Judge is unbiased and understands science, we win. The media couldn’t ignore that. That idea has become the basis for legal research by notable attorneys and discussion among global warming debunkers, but it’s a long way from the Court room.

I am very serious about this issue. I think stamping out the global warming scam is vital to saving our wonderful way of life.

The battle against fossil fuels has controlled policy in this country for decades. It was the environmentalist’s prime force in blocking any drilling for oil in this country and the blocking the building of any new refineries, as well. So now the shortage they created has sent gasoline prices soaring. And, it has lead to the folly of ethanol, which is also partly behind the fuel price increases; that and our restricted oil policy. The ethanol folly is also creating a food crisis throughout the world – it is behind the food price rises for all the grains, for cereals, bread, everything that relies on corn or soy or wheat, including animals that are fed corn, most processed foods that use corn oil or soybean oil or corn syrup. Food shortages or high costs have led to food riots in some third world countries and made the cost of eating out or at home budget busting for many.

So now the global warming myth actually has lead to the chaos we are now enduring with energy and food prices. We pay for it every time we fill our gas tanks. Not only is it running up gasoline prices, it has changed government policy impacting our taxes, our utility bills and the entire focus of government funding. And, now the Congress is considering a cap and trade carbon credits policy. We the citizens will pay for that, too. It all ends up in our taxes and the price of goods and services.

So the Global warming frenzy is, indeed, threatening our civilization. Not because global warming is real; it is not. But because of the all the horrible side effects of the global warming scam.

I love this civilization. I want to do my part to protect it.

If Al Gore and his global warming scare dictates the future policy of our governments, the current economic downturn could indeed become a recession, drift into a depression and our modern civilization could fall into an abyss. And it would largely be a direct result of the global warming frenzy.

My mission, in what is left of a long and exciting lifetime, is to stamp out this Global Warming silliness and let all of us get on with enjoying our lives and loving our planet, Earth.