Celebrity Carbon Offsets

28 03 2007

Sorry, guys. I’ve been meaning to get a blogroll going, but it just hasn’t happened.

In the meantime, I’m ready to announce one of the two celebrities who will be the recipient of a Celebrity Carbon Offset.

None other than Hollywood heartthrob of hotness….

Leonardo DiCaprio.

INTERVIEWER: OK, Leo… let’s see some of your acting chops. Show us, without using words, how strong your critical thinking skills are.leo-this-small.jpg
He really is a shameless shill for the Goracle. It’s sad that showmanship triumphs over substance and science.

Here’s one of his houses.

16096gif.png

I wonder how big the garage is? How many carbon-spouting plane rides to get to an fro? Some of those big budget movies film in remote locations… how many people have to fly there? I’m just sayin’ … movie credits are pretty long.

He definitely deserves this Celebrity Carbon Offset.

king-of-the-globe-rbg.png

Above illustration from The Ryskind Sketchbook.





Global Warming Halts Hollywood

28 03 2007

From The Telegraph (UK):

A deadly species of jellyfish, translucent and the size of a thumbnail, is spreading along Australia’s coastline as a result of global warming, scientists warned today.

 

Irukandji jellyfish are among the world’s most toxic creatures – all but impossible to detect in the water but packing a potentially lethal punch belying their tiny size.

Until recently it was thought that they were confined to Australia’s northern tropical waters, but marine biologists have now found them off Queensland’s Fraser Island — a popular tourist spot about 400 miles south of their previously assumed range.

Their discovery has halted production of a Hollywood film, Fool’s Gold, starring Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey, who were originally due to be filmed swimming in the sea. Dr Jamie Seymour, from James Cook University, said she had found five of the animals off the island.

The natural perils of the world are being blamed on global warming.  Don’t believe the hype.





Some Burning Questions

28 03 2007

The American Chronicle asks some poignant questions:

Are we being programmed; sold a “bill of goods” concerning earth changes and global warming, and if we are, who is responsible for the propaganda and what is their end game? Can it be as simple as differences between the Democratic and Republican political parties: liberals versus conservatives?

The debate concerning global warming is reaching critical mass. Proponents exaggerate claims and demonize opponents to their theology. They are recruiting the children of the earth as their ambassadors. Their rhetoric spreads disinformation, causes political polarization and is planting the seeds for religious and ideological revolution. Is this a primal revival of some basis instinct inherent in all humans, or is this a fabricated theory orchestrated by an unseen hand for an unknown purpose?





More On “The Great Global Warming Swindle”

28 03 2007

From The Weekly Standard:

The film notes that much more carbon dioxide is produced by natural means than by industrial emissions: Volcanic emissions, carbon dioxide from animals, bacteria, decaying vegetation, and the oceans “outweigh our own production several times over.” We’re also reminded that as recently as the 1970s the scientific community was convinced that earth was headed for another ice age–and balked at the suggestion that greenhouse gases could ward off a chilly future. So what might explain the current warming trend? Durkin’s team of climatologists and astrophysicists point to evidence suggesting that as radiation from the sun varies–measured, for example, by sun-spot activity–the earth tends to heat up or cool down. “Solar activity,” the film alleges, “very precisely matches the plot of temperature change over the last 100 years.”

If you haven’t yet seen the movie, it is a must-see. Click below.

Previous Inconvenience:

The Great Global Warming Swindle (video) 





Ga-Ga For Gore

28 03 2007

I’m copying the whole article from this cached google listing because the original editorial has mysteriously disappeared.

Suddenly cool Al Gore looks like a good choice

Mercury News Editorial

Al Gore could become the only man to win an Oscar, a Nobel Prize and his party’s presidential nomination within a span of 12 months.

He already has collected an Oscar for his global-warming documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.” (Actually, that’s two Oscars, if you count best song.) He’s been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by an admiring Norwegian lawmaker. But to have a shot at the trifecta — California’s presidential primary will be 11 months from tomorrow — Gore will have to declare himself a candidate for president.

We hope he goes for it.

Gore has said repeatedly that he’s happy doing what he’s doing, while not irrevocably ruling out a run. Friends and former aides are hedging bets.

In coming months, we’ll be seeing plenty of him. He’ll be promoting his new book and orchestrating a seven-continent concert extravaganza to raise awareness of global warming. (On 7/7/07, the sun will never set on impresario Al Gore’s empire.) But by fall, it may not be just the Earth that needs saving, but also the Democratic Party.

He wouldn’t be the only good candidate; at this point, every Democrat in the race looks Lincolnesque compared with George W. Bush. And for all the time Gore has spent around Hollywood, he’ll never be a great campaigner. Even Cameron Diaz can’t loosen him up. When he’s in front of a crowd, he still tends to sound patronizing.

But on the issues that most Americans and most in the valley care about — the war, the fragile state of the Earth, the transforming power of technology — Gore has been out front, resolute and right.

The man who has turned global warming from enviro-grumbling into a powerful cause is more popular now than seven years ago, when the majority of Americans thought they had elected him president.

Liberated from politics the past seven years, Gore has shown sides of himself that most Americans didn’t see when he was in Bill Clinton’s shadow and when he made that uninspiring run for president in 2000.

At this point, he may be the strongest, ablest Democratic candidate of his generation.

If, after what promises to be a long and tiring campaign summer, Hillary Rodham Clinton grates, Barack Obama falters, Joe Biden again stumbles, John Edwards fades and Bill Richardson crumbles — not unlikely scenarios — the nomination may be Gore’s for the taking.

Gore has stood by long-held convictions. He came out early and strongly against the war. What was dismissed then as sour grapes is now praised as wisdom.

The first President Bush mocked him as “ozone man.” Now, corporations seek his counsel on global warming.

Liberated from Washington, Gore has expanded his reach from Silicon Valley, which he has frequented for years, to Hollywood, where he was able to translate his knowledge into a populist movement. He’s on a first-name basis with Leonardo DiCaprio and Steve Jobs. He has served as an adviser to Google and board member of Apple. He’s developed a Silicon Valley perspective not for the sake of cocktail chatter or campaign cash but out of a longstanding fascination with the Internet. (His alleged claim to have invented the Internet is a bum rap, but he was talking it up long before most members of Congress had even heard of e-mail.)

“An Inconvenient Truth” has made environmental activism — and Gore, in all his woodenness — cool again. Thousands flock to his lectures on campuses. Rock stars go gaga over him.

But more important, international leaders, who turned against America when Bush scoffed at treaties and rejected diplomacy, respect and admire Gore.

However much he has achieved in the past seven years, President Gore could achieve what citizen Gore cannot. So bide your time, Al Gore, as Bobby Kennedy did in ‘68. The campaign is too long as it is. But don’t waver when the moment comes. [emphasis added-ed]

Previous Inconvenience:

The Juggernaut





Michael Crichton On Global Warming

28 03 2007

In my view, our approach to global warming exemplifies everything that is wrong with our approach to the environment. We are basing our decisions on speculation, not evidence. Proponents are pressing their views with more PR than scientific data. Indeed, we have allowed the whole issue to be politicized: red vs blue, Republican vs Democrat. This is in my view absurd. Data aren’t political. Data are data. Politics leads you in the direction of a belief.  Data, if you follow them, lead you to truth.

The whole speech, which he made to the National Press Club, is called “Our Environmental Future.”





Music To My Ears

28 03 2007

From The Hill, via Drudge:

Fresh from his face-to-face tussle with former Vice President Al Gore, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) is vowing to stall Gore’s hotly anticipated Capitol concert to draw attention to global warming.

Inhofe’s belief that climate change is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” is common knowledge in the capitol, and environmental groups cheered the new prospects for carbon-capping legislation when he ceded the Environment and Public Works Committee gavel this session. But Inhofe’s parliamentary powers can block indefinitely the resolution that would permit Gore to choose the capitol’s West Front for the U.S. leg of his seven-continent Live Earth concert tour — a collaboration between Gore and promoter Kevin Wall, who masterminded previous blockbuster charity concerts Live Aid and Live 8.

Previous Inconveniences:

The Soothing Sounds Of Global Warming
Part Of Gore’s “Mass Persuasion” Campaign