I Agree Mostly, But...

I agree with Geert Wilders on many of the things he talks about in his interview with the Wall Street Journal. I do think that Western culture, which includes Democracy, capitalism, the rule of law and respect for others, is superior to a religiously based government that gives preferential treatment to individuals who are of a particular sect or faith. This is one of the reasons we have so many Europeans in the Americas in the first place.

The evidence for the assertions that Western culture is superior can be seen in where people go when they immigrate from their home countries. If dictatorships, socialism or Islamic rule was so much better, people in the US would be fleeing South of the border, jumping on ships to travel to Russia or China, or hi-jacking planes and demanding to be taken to Tehran, Cairo or Baghdad. However, the opposite of this is true.

However, the sticking point in all of this is how to get people to assimilate to OUR culture. This is hard because one of the main reasons our culture is so successful is we assimilate a lot from other cultures. Our governmental organization is Greek, our Courts are English, our language uses a smattering of many other tongues, including Spanish and French, our scientists are German, Jewish, Indian, Chinese and many other nationalities. All of this has been worked together over 200 years to develop the nation we have now.

I think there is one common thing that all of these contributions to our culture have in common. They all WORK. Every single one of these contributions supports the others.

Now, how would all of this work if we start kow-towing to one particular point of view? The answer is simple; it will break. Geerts tells people, "You have to give up that book." I don't think we should go that far, but I do think you shouldn't push your book in my face in my country. If you don't like it, go home.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Jim Hopkins has a blog. Nothing new in this. Jim wants to make money on his blog by charging for subscriptions and through ad revenues. Nothing wrong there. However, I think Jim's blog is struggling (according to reports) because of the industry, and more importantly the audience, he's trying to address.

Jim is using the internet to talk to people who seem to hold the internet, and blogging in particular, in ill regard (4th paragraph down). I am speaking of members of the main stream media, specifically print media. There is good reason for the troubles between print and blogs. Where as one is receding, the other is just coming into it's own. This gap will continue to widen.

So, Jim is trying to convince a hold out group of print writers that they should a) read his online blog and b) pay for it. Sounds like a tough sell.

If he rally wants to make money on his blog, he should look more at expanding his reach and doing a bit more marketing... like, say, giving an interview with a link back to his site.

Today I Give Thanks...

that I have a wonderful family, a good job and enough where-with-all to pay my bills and buy fun stuff.

I also know where my blessings come from. I believe in a Creator and know that he wants to bless us. Everything we have if from Him.

Please give thanks for your blessings today, even the breath in our lungs and the health of our bodies are blessings.

We Need More Good News Like This

Lest we forget Afghanistan because of our Iraqi involvement, things are still pretty hot in the erst-while land of the Taliban. This article points to our troops still fighting the good fight. Pretty freakin' awesome that 30 of our guys are worth at least 250 of theirs.

A couple of things to remember.

1) We're in Afghanistan because this is where AQ decided to camp out and train. We didn't want to be there. Our hand was forced by a government that supported those who made war on America and attacked us, unprovoked.

2) The Marines consistently demonstrate the importance of a highly trained, highly MOTIVATED force and what can be accomplished by such people. This is what America needs more of, motivated individuals who want to make the world safer for those who would attack innocent people in their homes and offices.

Never Forget, September 11th happened because Osama bin Laden thought America was a "paper tiger" that would never fight back. Now, with victory in Iraq, we can go back and finish the job in Afghanistan (if this President doesn't make the same mistake that led bin Laden to think America was a push over in the first place).

Protect My Rights... ALL OF THEM!!

Holy cow! Can you believe the audacity of the president elect's administration, including this question in their job application packet? As was correctly pointed out on another website, this is discriminating against people who chose to exercise one of their rights.

Now remember, this is the same gentleman who wouldn't change gun laws (bottom of the page) to ensure people defending themselves in their homes were not charged with a crime. He is supported by a Vice President who helped write the Assault Weapons Ban, some of the most illogical rules about gun restrictions based on the appearance of the weapon.

I hope the NRA keeps up their pressure on Obama, because if they don't we may see our legal, individual right to own a gun taken away from us.

Real, Sound Business Statements

Wow!



Romney hits the nail on the head. Bankruptcy is not the end of the world. Instead, it is a chance for businesses to restructure and be "competitive long term" against foreign auto makers. Without the chance to restructure, we're simply putting off the time when the automakers will HAVE to go bankrupt and restructure.

The alternative to bankruptcy is for these private companies to be given public funds. Now, we can see how well they are stewards of their own money. They feel it's appropriate in these hard times to continue using their money for transportation costs that, frankly, are not necessary. This is not fiscal responsibility.

I say make the big three be responsible for their decisions. Let it be now.

Hat tip to Hot Air for the video.

Accelerated College Entry? Not a Good Idea.

Okay, so according to Time Magazine, kids should be ready to go to college by 16 years old (thanks to the Last Psychiatrist for the link). My answer is, "Are you crazy or just not in touch with reality?"

Let me get this straight, a state that has special requirements on allowing teens under 18 to drive is considering putting them in charge of their lives at an earlier age? This doesn't make sense from a logic stand point. I mean, if you can't trust them on the road to make good decisions, how can you expect them to decide THE REST OF THEIR LIVES at age 16? And make no mistake, choosing to go to a college at age 16 will affect the rest of their life.

In the article, they keep talking about trying to emulate European and Asian countries. This would be fine, except for the fact that many Europeans and Asians want to come to our universities because we have the best universities in the world. Why weaken our universities with an unprepared populace, when instead we should be talking about how to address the concerns that cause students to "slide through high school."

We should be working to make high school challenging for everyone.

Where is their vaunted 'tolerance?'

Sad that a simple shirt can cause this kind of reaction. Of course, there are plenty of us who have seen similar reactions from these tolerant people. We could have warned her to be careful about standing out, especially when standing up to the Liberal Left. After all, these are the people who would want to overturn the vote of the majority, and are willing to use threatening tactics, even stooping to attacking an old woman, to get their message of "inclusion" across.

Maybe it's because Liberals just don't get Conservatives (10 paragraphs up from the bottom) that they have such a hard time treating Conservatives like normal people.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Fallacy-part 2 of many

Okay, this is taking a little longer than I thought. However, the research has been pretty enlightening.

Last time, we looked at some of the problems with the IPCC model, which Gore uses to predict the weather changes that will cause catastrophic events across the globe. Today, we will look at the second piece of evidence. The linchpin of his argument, the Vostok Ice Core charts. He shows a chart that covers the past 420,000 years and looks like this.

We can clearly see the rise and fall of temperature and CO2 for thousands of years. Looking at this chart, one would expect this rise and fall to continue, since that is what has happened in the past. It's like the rising and setting of the sun. There is some time variation, but it happens regularly. Those who argue that there is anthropogenic global warming, however, seem to think the sun will not rise tomorrow. They assume the cycle is broken because of CO2 levels.

There is a relation between temperature and CO2 levels. Notice the correlation between CO2 and temperature changes in the chart. As the temperature gets warmer, we see an increased level of CO2. As the temperature change goes down, we see a decrease in CO2. Gore and his climate scientists have chosen to state that CO2 has enough influence on our temperature to cause havoc over the next 50 to 100 years.

Well, unfortunately the above chart has too wide of a data spread to show whether CO2 really has that much of an effect on temperature. Instead, lets look at a smaller segment of the chart. Since modern times have provided more accurate information, lets look at information from just the last 18,000 years. This gives us enough time to see historic trends, yet still see more about the actual relationship.

Notice a couple of things from this chart. It fits with the initial chart data, showing a correlation between CO2 and temperature change. It also fits the trend displayed for modern times in the original chart. However, when we look closer, we see something interesting. Look specifically around 14,000, 11,000, 8,000, 7,500, 4,500 and our modern times. Notice anything?

What you're seeing are multiple places where temperature changes and CO2 changes do not react in direct correlation with each other. In 14,000, temperature rises before CO2. A similar phenomenon happens around 11,000, with temperature spiking and falling, followed by a much shallower rise and fall in CO2. Around 8,000, temperature changed rapidly with no movement of CO2. In 7,500 CO2 falls and rises with no change in temperature. In 4,500, we see another temperature spike that last a bit longer. Again, though, there was no change in CO2. Only a little later do we see CO2 levels rise.

The Modern data is another indicator that shows the weak relationship between CO2 and climate change. CO2 is rising at a faster rate, and to higher levels, than ever. This is a fact. However, where is the corresponding climate change? Remember, Gore stated that CO2 was causing the massive changes and rising temperatures of modern times. Based on the data, though, this doesn't seem to be true.

So, if the model isn't accurate, and Gore's hypothesis about CO2 is not correct, what can be causing global warming? More to come next time about relationships between the sun, our global temperatures and temperatures of other planets in our solar system.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Fallacy-part 1 of many

Bare with me, as this may be a long post. I think I'll actually break this into two parts to present all of the information.

Now, we have to define our terms and set the record straight. There is undeniable evidence that the Earth has been getting warmer. This is not in doubt. What is in doubt is man's role in global climate change. Currently, according to Al Gore and the group of 1200 UN scientists, global warming is caused by CO2. This means, in simple terms, a rise in CO2 will lead to a direct rise in temperature. This is Gore's whole premise. No other possibilities seem to be discussed, at least none that made it to any of the larger news sources.

Gore offers two major items as his evidence: the Vostok ice core data charts and the IPCC temperature models. Based on these two pieces of evidence, Gore suggests that there will be "catastrophic consequences" from global warming. So, to combat these consequences and slow or reverse global warming, we (humans) have to change our habits.

However, there are a few holes in Gore's hypothesis.

First is the weakness of the IPCC temperature model. Apparently, the models were not calibrated to our current conditions. This means the models were compromised. In addition, the weakness of the interpretation of the model information, specifically the 7th chapter dealing with "atmospheric processes and feedback" that affect global temperatures.

Interesting that the model has some weaknesses. It's almost like they wanted the model to predict bad tidings for some reason.

More to come later.

Exercise Your Rights Now, Before they're Taken Away

I do not think it is a coincidence that, with Obama recently elected, more people are out buying hand guns. This has been reported in multiple news sources over the past couple of weeks. Seriously, go read.

Link 1, Link 2, Link 3 and Link 4.

One obvious conclusion from this news is that people do not trust Obama when he says he will not try to take away people's guns. And why would they think this? Part of this is because he has provided very unclear and at times completely contradictory statements about the legality of guns and gun ownership. So, to look beyond the statements, let's look at his past voting record. What do we see? A man who does not trust the populace with handguns or certain types of amunition. Actions speak louder than words. This is a man who will move to restrict gun ownership and conceal and carry laws, if he can.

This means if you want to own an assault rifle, or high capacity magazine, or exercise your constitutional right to own a hand gun designed for personal protection, you should be on your way to the local gun shop in your area NOW, while it's still legal.

The Best We Can Hope For...

Well, the American public has opted for change! They've decided to elect a man who probably couldn't get a top secret clearance because of his past associations.

There are two ways this can go for the American public, based on why Obama associated with the people he did.

1) Obama is a true believer and managed to hide this during the election. - Of course, this is the worst case for the American public. If Obama truly supports Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers, and believes in a similar manner, Obama will steer this country further to the left than we have ever been. He would put in place entitlements to "underprivelaged classes" that would move us closer to socialism.

This would be disastrous. It would lead to increased government and decreased personal choice.

2) In this option, Obama is a political animal and simply made the most of the connections he had to help him in his political career. He stayed in the Church for 20 years becuase it gave him political clout. He launched his career in the home of Bill Ayers becuase Bill happens to have connections to the local politicians. There is ample evidence for this political animal explanation, based on how Obama has shed himself of various people in his campaign in the past.

Let us pray that it is option 2, for the sake of America.

Go Vote!!

'Nuff said.