On the eve of a momentous environmental debate, a key scientific player falls from grace

Just days before the McKibben vs Epstein environmental debate, November 5, at Duke University, a bombshell rocked the environmental community. Read more: "Michael Mann Retracts False Nobel Prize Claims in Humiliating Climbdown."

See the entire debate here

The Nobel Prize committee declared Penn States Professor, Michael Mann, has falsely claimed to be a recipient of the Nobel Prize; He never received an award from them.  Both he and Penn State  have been claiming for years, his Nobel status to boost his scientific prestige and credibility.

To Mann, the litigious creator of the climate “Hockey Stick” graph, this is an extreme blow to any scientific credibility he may have had.  The "hockey stick graph" was used by Al Gore  and others to convince us we were on the verge of climate catastrophe,  One critic stated: “Michael Mann is another black mark against anyone involved in “climate science.”

Penn State, still reeling from a sex scandal that threatened its accreditation, suffers another huge blow to its reputation. But the taint of Penn States scandal will  now waft over the environmental movement, which has used Manns science to further its war against fossil fuels.  This latest scandal throws into question the validity of the science behind the “climate change” movement.

There is a huge, well funded, well coordinated movement throughout the United States, set on the goal of completely killing our use of fossil energy.  One of the main public spokesman and virulent foes of fossil energy is Bill McKibben.  McKibben recently stated fossil fuel is public enemy #1 and has vowed to destroy our fossil based energy industry, source of 85% of our power.

But the fossil energy industry is not without its defenders and Alex Epstein has stepped up to the plate to defend what he calls “The foundation of our civilization: abundant and affordable energy.”

 When Epstein read an article in Rolling Stone Magazine,  declaring McKibben’s intent to declare fossil fuels public enemy #1 and his plan to mount a major campaign to make them practically illegal….Epstein decided to challenge him in a public debate. Epstein said; The war against fossil fuels is societal suicide.”

Epstein is an energy expert and President of the Center for Industrial Progress, a think tank that champions energy growth.  With scientific facts of its own to bolster its pro energy argument and history as a  guidepost to the beneficial use of fossil fuels for mankind…Epstein is a formidable spokesman to stand toe to toe with one of the lefts most high profile foes of fossil energy.

McKibben is recognized as one of the key people influencing President Obamas decision to delay the building of the Keystone Pipeline.  When he publicly states he wants to make the use of fossil fuels illegal, it is a reflection of an overall strategy to fundamentally transform our society. 

In a Bill McKibben world, our energy would be supplied mainly by windmills and solar. Historically and at present technological levels, these forms of energy could not put a dent in the energy needs of our advanced society.  This means civilization would have to become more primitive and a large segment of our population would revert to manual labor focused on farming.

Alex Epstein totally disagrees with this vision.

“In this debate, I want the public to know the truth about what will benefit their lives and what will harm it.  My goal is to put a stop on the attack on fossil fuels & reverse this fight.  I want to create a new generation of energy champions.”

The militancy of the war on fossil energy, brings a huge price tag with it.  Already there are job losses in coal which is under assault.  Gasoline is double the price it was 4 years ago and utility rates will skyrocket as rate payers are forced to pay the subsidies given to "green energy," which McKibben and his allies want to force on society.

Epstein says:  "The last thing true scientifically is, we need to destroy our energy supply. That is the least scientific statement a human could make and is the most suicidal statement a human could make."  “Bill McKibben and his movement are free to make us an offer in the free market of ideas…. let them convince us.  But they don’t have the right to force us, or give us an order.”

This debate is a rare opportunity for the public to witness the clash of powerful ideas that are being used to re-shape our civilization.  With professor Manns  loss of stature in the scientific community, the climate change movement has a lot to answer for and we will expect answers November 5.

 

Eds articles are carried in:IrishCentral

Energy independence-Politics & More

Carrollstandard.com

Tea Party Cheer

Tea Party Patriots

AMAC
Restoring Liberty

Decades of mismanagement have left our forests vulnerable to terrorism

Smokey Bear told us: “Only we can prevent forest fires.” But behind him was a vast and growing firefighting bureaucracy, equipped with fleets of heavy equipment, aerial tankers, helicopters and satellite guided workforces.

This firefighting juggernaut has not only crushed many would be disastrous fires over the years, but many beneficial ones as well.

Many of the forests protected by these fire fighting efforts have also been shielded from best forest management practices.  In the name of restoring our forests to their former pre-mankind condition, man was taken out of the equation. As a result, many of our forests are unnaturally overgrown with decades of underbrush, dry branches and millions of disease ridden trees.  

But the west is now on fire and reports say some of these fires have been caused by arson. This  leads many to believe that America's national security Achilles heel,  is it's tinder dry, over protected, overgrown forests, which can instantly be transformed into mega-fires with one match.

The Lake Tahoe basin which sits on the border of California and Nevada was managed by a maze of bureaucratic environmental agencies.  Through ineptitude, these agencies did not allow property owners to even hand clean brush on their property, in the fear that it would intrude on the "natural state" of the forest.

As a result of this idiotic forest management practice, the area was consumed by a mega fire which burned down 253 homes and consumed 3,100 acres……This is just 1 small forest area out of hundreds of thousands of square miles being subjected to the same or similar practices. 

But there is a solution to the madness which has proven over and over again to work.  When these rampaging fires reach privately managed forest land, they are checked.

Privately owned or leased forests, are maintained to produce a healthy vibrant environment which can in turn, be used to harvest timber and forest products.  They are in the business of having forests of healthy trees and do what’s necessary to make them that way.

I spoke to Tom Ray, vice president of northwest resources for Plum Creek Corporation. Plum Creek is the largest and most geographically diverse private timberland owner in the United States with approximately 6.6 million acres of timber in major timber producing regions of the country.

Tom helps manage his company’s land according to the Sustainable Forest Initiative, which looks out for the best long term care of their forests.  These practices include thinning-harvesting of timber and brush clearing as necessary. 

Managing the land in a healthy vibrant condition is good for the forests as well as for the owners of the property.

Tom said out of control fires on public lands that have swept into managed forests, have been stopped.  The fire intensity lessened due to the availability of less fuel and the presence of access roads on managed forests allowed personnel to reach the fires.

Much of Plum Creeks 6.6 million acres of land is open to the public for recreation purposes as well, showing that private forest land management is compatible with public use.

When you look at the ability of just one corporation to successfully manage 6.6 million acres of forest land, it doesn’t take much to wonder why some of these practices aren’t transferred to our national and state forestlands.  After all, the public can have access to these privately managed lands that are not dry diseased tinderboxes.

Peter Kolb, Associate Professor of Forest management at the University of Montana has been observing the effects of public policies affecting forests across the Northern Rockies for years.

Kolb has determined that forests can benefit from well planned and thoughtful tree harvesting in order to help revitalize forest landscapes that have become homogenized by a combination of past climatic phases and fire suppression, which produce mega fires. 

He feels it is best to create a forest with greater species and structural diversity using a combination of thinning and irregular sized” patch” cuts.   These types of mosaics in the forest have been shown to provide firebreaks, good habitat enhancement for wildlife and a birthplace for a new generation of trees. 

Such management emulates historic natural process and forests can be made more resilient and functional for the future…. This is the definition of conservation – “to keep “functioning” rather than “restoration” which is to bring back to the way it was.

But many conservation groups seem to be stuck with the outdated concept of bringing forests back to a snapshot of 200 years ago

Perhaps we should be focusing more on what it will take to keep forests healthy and functional in the future.  It seems obvious that the hands-off approach is not working all that well, and costing us an enormous federal bankroll we can ill afford. 

Private companies could provide active forest management more consistent with conservation, and at no cost.  But rather could provide tax revenue and jobs, in exchange for harvesting some timber across the vast national forests of the west.   

Forestry, logging and science, have come a long way over the decades, it’s time to move into the future and allow a different paradigm to take over.  It’s time to help our forests cope with changes in climate and the wildfires and insect outbreaks that come with them in unprecedented destructive waves.

 The most unique gifts: Time capsules in American and world history: lifemagforsale.com

For other points of view visit Carroll Standard: carrollstandard.com

Did the Government meddling turn Chevy Volts into Chariots of Fire?

Last month it was announced that General Motors was going to suspend production of their all electric car known as the Chevy Volt, due to disappointing sales.

Sales for this car have been slow in spite of massive government subsidies and getting the spotlight of every green organization you can think of.  It seems no amount of taxpayer money is going to entice a buyer, so the cars sit in showrooms and inventories, unsold.

The Volt was the recipient of such "green awards" as: 2009 Green Car Vision Award-2011 Green Car of the Year-2011 North American Car of the Year-2011 World Green Car-2012 European Green Car of the Year.  All very prestigious honors to have for a new model of car.

But getting "green" awards, doesn't insure a company will "get the green" when it comes to competing in the free marketplace.  Below the hoopla, awards and marketing glitz, there has to be a compelling reason for the public to purchase a small car with a price tag of  46,000.  Even with a 7,500  federal tax credit to soften the sticker shock, the price is a big problem.  Especially when you can buy a similarly sized gas powered Chevy Cruze,  rated at 36 MPG highway and has an average selling price of $19,656. 

When the Government stepped in and bailed out General Motors in 2009, it allowed, in many peoples opinion, undue influence in the design of this car by an administration without any business or car manufacturing experience.  But what the administration lacked in practical experience, it more than made up for with a green agenda.  So instead of designing a car that could be competitive in a free market with appeal to millions of potential buyers, it produced the Volt.
-----------------
Read more:
Powerful Association of Irish Priests warns Vatican over “heresy hunting” 

New and powerful survivor’s account of the sinking of the Titanic
-----------------
To add to the bad public perception this car has had, there are reports of battery fires in collision tests and fires starting during  battery charge, hence the nick name "chariots of fire"

Actual users of the car have reported as little as 25 miles on a full 12 hour charge before it switched over to the gas drive.  Really nothing to brag about when you pay that much for a car. Someone said perhaps the reason to buy a Volt is to do something good for the planet rather than buy a good product.

But even if your intentions are truly green and your desire is to do something good for the planet by purchasing these electric cars, remember most of our electricity is produced by coal fired/fossil fueled power plants.  Any savings in "carbon credits" that the car buyer may think he is accomplishing, is being burned up by coal to produce the electricity which charges these cars.

To many people in the private sector this is a prime example of why government should stay out of determining winners and losers in the energy sector as well as manufacturing sector.  The government sunk 50 billion into GM to bail it out and it still hasn't paid us back, in spite of what is reported in the media. The Treasury Department says nearly 70 executives at American International Group Inc., Ally Financial Inc. and General Motors Co. had their annual compensation reduced by 10 percent. All three companies have yet to repay what they received from the $700 billion bailout and therefore are subject to pay cuts.

In the meantime, around the world, countries are reversing their decisions on solar energy and backing out. Germany earlier this year announced they were cutting back on solar subsidies.  China will accelerate the use of new-energy sources such as nuclear energy and put an end to blind expansion in industries such as solar energy and wind power in 2012, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao says in a government report published on March 5.

China's national policy means they will direct their resources into developing nuclear and hydro electric power.  Certainly doesn't mean they won't keep producing those solar panels to make profits at the expense of governments that force their countries economies down the path of solar.

Chariots of fire are ancient descriptions first appearing as paintings on cave walls. Then the name was  borrowed for a 1981 movie.  Now a battery powered car bears the honor.