Hope you’re able to spend time with loved ones and make it memorable…even if you go to bed at 8:00.

LOL, which is MY bedtime.

And…remembering Mr. Padgitt…

Simon at Classical Values, Patterico , Instapundit and Ace. Thanks to a tip from Kat.

This Marine is about to deploy for his second tour in Iraq, and the guy knows he won’t be able to appear in court after a certain date, which is why the lawyer has on-purposed planned a continuance for while he’s deployed.

Grodner, the lawyer, according to the Illinois State’s Attorneys, will get away with defacing Mike’s car without penalty because

1) Mike is about to deploy to Iraq and will not be available to appear in court, and 2) Grodner is a lawyer and can get out of this very easily.

There is over $2,000 worth of damage to the car.

So, does anyone have any ideas about how to proceed? All peaceful and rational ideas are welcomed. We are contacting the media about this, too.

Please pass this story on to anyone you know that might be able to help. Contact me if you have any information or ideas.

Make this go viral!

If you have any ideas on how this can be resolved (yeah I know - but the Marine wants to do it legal like) contact Black Five at his blog or send him an e-mail

blackfive
at
gmail
dot
com

Najda discusses the making of a very different and interesting Christmas album in the vid above, which includes elements from a number of different musical styles and genres.

Here young Najda making her New York debut at Carnegie Hall in 1982. What is shown is an excerpt from her exciting and passionate version of Tchaikovsky’s violin concerto. Najda was a Julliard competiton winner, and you wouldn’t know it, but she was about ready to give up on her violin at that time.

Here is more; a brief excerpt of Mendelssohn’s Violin Concerto from “Speaking in Strings”.

Najda is a courageous pioneer and her violin work is strong, unique and recognizable. I first saw her on the 1999 program, “Speaking in Strings”, and immediately ran out, searching for the album. I had to order it, but it was worth the wait. I’ve been hooked ever since. In the program, she struck me almost as if she were someone I knew; this tough little New York chick with the New York accent and leather jacket, who marched out to take breaks from rehearsals to smoke. It’s not surprising that she’s known as the ‘bad girl’ of violin. She said “feeling more than any person I know is a curse.”

She grabbed me somehow. Her renditions of Sibelius’ magnificent Violin Concerto, Prokofiev’s The Love for Three Oranges, Saint-Saëns’ Carnival of the Animals: The Swan, and Shostakovich’s violin concerto, Rachmaninov -Paganini -are absolutely riveting. She was so much the complete opposite of any classical pianist, violinist or cellist I’ve ever known, that I was completely glued to the television set, watching the excerpts of her performances.

Although this program seemed to focus on her unusual personality more than the music, I would personally have liked to see more of the performances.

Purists may not appreciate her, particularly if they want pieces to sound the same no matter who plays it.

Exposure to Nadja’s work gave me a new appreciation for the classics. She has some very different music out there - including a tribute to the 40’s, so it’s not limited to the classics only. She offers a unique and unforgettable interpretation, which is hard to forget, and the performances will stay with you just like your first ride on a motorcycle.

With their Nebula awards.

With thanks to GM Roper.

By the Sniper.

I’m not going to go through this turds entire life saga, but (shocka!) he has truth deficit disorder, like the rest of his ilk.

Read it…he does a great fisking job.

Jay Bedsole:

Since moths don’t typically land on tree trunks, Kettlewell used glue to attach dead, dark moths to dark tree trunks and dead, light moths to light tree trunks. He then photographed these moths to demonstrate the camouflage effect. The following comes from the National Center for Science Education (referring to and trying to justify these photographs):

“These pictures are illustrations used to demonstrate a point - the advantage of protective coloration to reduce the danger of predation. The pictures are not the scientific evidence used to prove the point in the first place. Compare this illustration to the well-known re-enactments of the Battle of Gettysburg. Does the fact that these re-enactments are staged prove that the battle never happened? The peppered moth photos are the same sort of illustration, not scientific evidence for natural selection.”

I guess I can see their point. By the same scientific standards we should proclaim that cold fusion, demonstrated by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, of the University of Utah in 1989… (the results of which have never been repeated…) is an example of good science. After all, it served to “illustrate” how great it would be to discover a source of unlimited free energy!

But are we to believe in these bits of science fiction simply because they’re rumored to be true?

What scientific good comes from promoting bad science? Scientist that still hold this up as an important example of Natural Selection in action are really trying to sell an idea. They believe the idea is right, therefore it is apparently justifiable to use bogus data to support that idea. It’s not the first time bad science has been used to sell this idea… Nebraska Man, Piltdown Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Haeckel’s Embryos, and more.

It’s learning about this kind of science that makes me question everything. That, in itself is a good thing, but what about the budding young scientists that simply trust the accepted scientific views based on the accepted scientific evidence? When the real truth diverges from the perceived truth, how long does it take us to get to the real truth if it is unacceptable to explore the real gaps in scientific knowledge?

And indeed we SHOULD be questioning it.

Recently there has been a wonderful addition to our blogging family, which is Hoosier Army Mom. She’s so wonderful, she has just fit in with several of our groups as though she’s been with us since the beginning.

She ended up in the Meatywatch group, and has been studying Meatbrain’s viciousness, along with that of his cronies, and has come up with an interesting idea; that Meatbrain is or could be Terry Bisson, the science fiction writer, who is also a member of “Socialist Scholars”. That is a contradiction in terms, LOL. It is their quest to promulgate socialist ideas through their fantasy pipe dreams of science fiction. And so the world of science fiction has opened up to me in an entirely new way.

Many science fiction writers are connected to the socialist networks, and just the other night my dad was commenting how leftists get promoted because they promote one another and give each other recommendations, and so they seem to move a lot faster than people who aren’t socialist/communist-connected. This works in Hollywood as well as in other areas of the arts, as they’re very thick with each other.

At any rate, I was curious because of my past problems with Cramer and her lies about me and others, her pursuing me over the phone on my unlisted number when I didn’t give it to her, her using my name when both my unlisted number and my name were on the autotrack that Cafasso illegally posted on Stuporpatriots, and her putting up our confidentiality agreement with Jack and numerous other faux pas’s, and the fact that Cramer was involved with Joe Cafasso and was helping him pimp Stuporpatriots blog but didn’t know it because he was pretending to be Gerry Blackwood.

This is a mere window in the life of the socialist funambulists!

She even put up a “first annual Jack Idema awards” but never followed it up. This I found rather odd, because of all of this is so damned funny, why not make it annual, as she had so happily proclaimed it?

Could it be that the bottom fell out from underneath her buddy, Eddy Reames from Flogging the Simian, to the point where he disappeared? And Joe Cafasso bilked her for $20 grand and skipped out on her, but then Jack was released so Cafasso went underground?

This is typical of a science fiction writer; because they live in a fantasyworld so even their real lives read like fantasy.

Meatbrain and other commie types like Stephen Pearcy are very interested in uncovering the true identities of the people with whom they disagree. But Meatbrain has been very interesting in terms of his own.

When looking into this, we discovered that Cramer and David Hartwell have Year’s Best Fantasy books, and quite a few of them highlight the work of this Terry Bisson character.

They’ve been clever about not revealing themselves as associated with one another; usually you would find numerous pictures of Cramer on the internet in her albums at flickr or on her blog, because she loves to hobnob with people she thinks are important, and she loves pushing that in your face.

Personally I get sick of looking at pictures of her children and her going on and on like a broken record about stuff I don’t really care about. Why people are interested in her is beyond me, and why people are interested in Terry Bisson is beyond me, too.

If Bisson is Meatbrain at thinkingmeat.net, it would be funny. He uses some of Bisson’s work as hints that he’s at the very least, a Bisson fan. But his behavior indicates he is much more than just a fan….

I really don’t have time to get into the rest of this–but I’ll take this one idiotic comment from the many hysterical comments from the man in the bathtub–since he’s completely off his rocker in terms of self control at this point. He quotes me:

The peppered moth doesn’t even sit on tree trunks; they were placed there for a photo op.

Trofim Lysenko’s ghost from Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub says here: Well, that’s wrong. Think about this hard: A tree has bark and leaves. Do the moths rest on leaves? Almost never. What’s left?

Ok, Lysenko, here are the facts:

The fairytale of England’s famous peppered moths (Biston betularia) goes like this.

The moth comes in light and dark (melanic) forms. The assumption was that pollution from the Industrial Revolution darkened the tree trunks, mostly by killing the light-coloured covering lichen (plus darkening it with soot).

The lighter moths, which were well-camouflaged against the light background, now ‘stood out,’ and so the birds ate them at a higher ratio to the dark-colored moths, so the proportion of dark moths increased dramatically. Later, as pollution was cleaned up, the light moth became predominant again.

H.B. Kettlewell, who performed these classic experiments, said that if Darwin had seen this, ‘He would have witnessed the consummation and confirmation of his life’s work.’

This is a far-fetched and exaggerated claim, LOL…(but so was Rachel Carson’s claim that the American Robin was on the verge of extinction, that swallows were decreasing, or that DDT causes cancer, or Wurster’s claims about DDT’s magnifying effect in the food chain in the oceans, Erlich’s claims and apocalyptic predictions about the population explosion, Gore’s claims about CO₂, previous environmental hysteria over an upcoming ice age, the hockey stick, etc. This list is getting pretty long.) The textbook story of the peppered moths achieves little more than pointing out gene frequency shifting back and forth, within a single species. This shifting doesn’t add the sort of complex design information necessary for primordial soup-to-man evolution.

The other problem with it is that peppered moths don’t even rest on tree trunks during the day. Kettlewell attracted the moths into traps either with light, or with female pheromones—in each case, they only flew at night. Now think about that; this makes total sense. When do you see any moths flying? When you’re ducking into a well-lit building at night and trying to avoid the moths attracted to it. They’re attracted to streetlights or streetlamps at night. They fly to the interior light when you open your car door when it’s dark out. They are nocturnal, and active mostly at night. The question is, where are all these moths (Biston betularia) during the daytime?

Cyril Clarke, a British biologist who investigated the peppered moth, wrote:

‘But the problem is that we do not know the resting sites of the moth during the day time. … In 25 years we have found only two betularia on the tree trunks or walls adjacent to our traps (one on an appropriate background and one not), and none elsewhere.’

The moths filmed being eaten by birds were laboratory-bred, which Kettlewell placed on the tree trunks; they were so languid, that he had to warm them up on the hood of his car.

What about the infamous still photos of the moths on the tree trunks? One paper described how it was done—dead moths were glued to the tree. University of Massachusetts biologist Theodore Sargent helped glue moths onto trees for a NOVA documentary. He says textbooks and films have featured ‘a lot of fraudulent photographs.’

Kettlewell assumed (1) that the main defect of his release method was an unnaturally high density of moths, affecting merely the tempo of predation; and (2) that he could disregard the observation that many moths would have preferred to take up positions higher in the trees. Before the 1980’s most investigators shared Kettlewell’s second assumption, and many of them found it convenient to conduct predation experiments using dead specimens glued or pinned to tree trunks (e.g., Clarke and Sheppard 1966, Bishop 1972, Lees and Creed 1975, Bishop and Cook 1975, Steward 1977b, Murray et al. 1980). (Wells)

There is a very poor correlation between the lichen covering and respective moth populations. When one group of researchers glued dead moths onto trunks in an unpolluted forest, the birds took more of the dark (less camouflaged) ones, as expected. But their traps captured four times as many dark moths as light ones—the opposite of textbook predictions.

University of Chicago evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne agrees that the peppered moth story, which was ‘the prize horse in our stable,’ has to be thrown out.

This realization gave him the same feeling as when he found out that Santa Claus was not real.

When biologists looked beyond Birmingham and Dorset, where Kettlewell had conducted his experiments, they found discrepancies between Kettlewell’s theory and the actual geographical distribution of melanic moths. For example, if melanic moths in polluted woodlands enjoyed as much of a selective advantage as Kettlewell’s experiments seemed to indicate, then they should have completely replaced typicals in heavily polluted areas such as Manchester (Bishop and Cook 1980, Mani 1990). This never happened, however, indicating that factors other than selective predation must be affecting melanic frequencies. Some investigators attributed the discrepancy to heterozygote advantage (Clarke and Sheppard 1966, Lees and Creed 1975), but it has since been established that there is no evidence for this (Creed et al. 1980, Lees 1981, Mani 1982, Cook et al. 1986). (Wells, 1999)

Regrettably, students have been indoctrinated with fraudulent ‘proof’ of evolution, just as the 30-year period of Lysenko’s biologists suggests from their failed experiments (like the 50-liter milk a day producing cows that never materialized). But fervently feverishly and blindly clinging to the Lysenkoist ideology seems to me to be an example of what Ed at Millard Fillmore’s bathtub himself said in reference to me–‘you can’t parody scientific illiteracy’.–But what he’s revealing is the blind faith that Darwinists have in their pseudoscience and their victorian-age myth.

I’ll have much more on this as soon as time permits, but real science has exposed Piltdown Man’s skull as the careful dying of an oragutan’s skull and that of a human’s to appear as one-and-the-same, vestigial organs have functions, which is why they are no longer performing tonsillectomies like they once did as an example, haeckel’s embryos are frauds, there is no evidence in biology, genetics, the fossil record or taxonomy for evolution. Science has advanced, but the victorian-age religionists of the myth continue propping the already debunked propaganda as facts.

It doesn’t hold up under scrutiny with an open mind; which is what real scientific inquiry requires.

1. Kettlewell, H. (1959), ‘Darwin’s missing evidence’ in Evolution and the fossil record, readings from Scientific American, W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, p. 23, 1978.
2. Clarke, C.A. & G.S. Mani & G. Wynne, Evolution in reverse: clean air and the peppered moth, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 26:189–199, 1985; quote on p. 197.
3. Calgary Herald, p. D3, 21 March 1999.
4. Lees,D.R. & Creed, E.R. Industrial melanism in Biston betularia: the role of selective predation, Journal of Animal Ecology 44:67–83, 1975.
5. Coyne, Nature 396(6706):35–36.
6. The Washington Times, p. D8, 17 January 1999.
7. Lees, D.R. & Creed, E.R. ref. 4.
8. Unfettered by evolutionary fantasies, researchers can now look for the real causes of these population shifts. Could the dark moth variation actually have a function, like absorbing more warmth? Could it reflect conditions in the caterpillar stage? In a different nocturnal moth species, Sargent has found that the plants eaten by the larvae may induce or repress the expression of such ‘melanism’ in adult moths (see Sargent T.R. et al. in M.K. Hecht et al, Evolutionary Biology 30:299–322, Plenum Press, New York, 1998).
9. Weiland, C. (December, 2002) Goodbye, peppered moths-A classic evolutionary story comes unstuck; first published Creation 21(3):56; June 1999
10. Jonathan Wells, Ph.D (1999) Second Thoughts about Peppered Moths-This classical story of evolution by natural selection needs revising. Department of Molecular Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA
11. Berry RJ. 1990. Industrial melanism and peppered moths (Biston betularia (L.). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 39: 301-322.
12. Bishop JA. 1972. An experimental study of the cline of industrial melanism in Biston betularia (L.) (Lepidoptera) between urban Liverpool and rural North Wales. Journal of Animal Ecology 41: 209-243.
13. Bishop JA, Cook LM. 1975. Moths, melanism and clean air. Scientific American 232(1): 90-99.
14. Bishop JA, Cook LM. 1980. Industrial melanism and the urban environment. Advances in Ecological Research 11: 373-404.
15. Brakefield PM. 1985. Polymorphic Muellerian mimicry and interactions with thermal melanism in ladybirds and a soldier beetle: a hypothesis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 26: 243-267.
16. Brakefield PM. 1990. A decline of melanism in the peppered moth Biston betularia in The Netherlands. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 39: 327-334.
17. Clarke CA, Sheppard PM. 1966. A local survey of the distribution of industrial melanic forms in the moth Biston betularia and estimates of the selective values of these in an industrial environment. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 165: 424-439.
18. Clarke CA, Mani GS, Wynne G. 1985. Evolution in reverse: clean air and the peppered moth. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 26: 189- 199.
19. Cook LM, Mani GS, Varley ME. 1986. Postindustrial melanism in the peppered moth. Science 231: 611-613.
20. Creed ER. 1966. Geographic variation in the two-spot ladybird in England and Wales. Heredity 21: 57-72.
21. Creed ER, Lees DR, Bulmer MG. 1980. Pre-adult viability differences of melanic Biston betularia (L.) (Lepidoptera). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 13: 251-262.
22. Ford EB. 1937. Problems of heredity in the Lepidoptera. Biological Reviews 12: 461-503.
23. Ford EB. 1975. Ecological Genetics. 4th ed. London: Chapman and Hall.
24. Grant BS, Howlett RJ. 1988. Background selection by the peppered moth (Biston betularia Linn.): individual differences. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 33: 217-232.
25. Grant BS, Owen DF, Clarke CA. 1995. Decline of melanic moths. Nature 373: 565.
26. Grant BS, Owen DF, Clarke CA. 1996. Parallel rise and fall of melanic peppered moths in America and Britain. Journal of Heredity 87: 351- 357.
27. Grant BS, Cook AD, Clarke CA, Owen DF. 1998. Geographic and temporal variation in the incidence of melanism in peppered moth populations in America and Britain. Journal of Heredity 89: 465-471.
28. Harrison JWH. 1920. Genetical studies in the moths of the geometrid genus Oporabia (Oporinia) with a special consideration of melanism in the Lepidoptera. Journal of Genetics 9: 195-280.
29. Howlett RJ, Majerus MEN. 1987. The understanding of industrial melanism in the peppered moth (Biston betularia) (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 30: 31-44.
30. Jones JS. 1982. More to melanism than meets the eye. Nature 300: 109-110.
31. Kettlewell HBD. 1955. Selection experiments on industrial melanism in the Lepidoptera. Heredity 9: 323-342.
32. Kettlewell HBD. 1956. Further selection experiments on industrial melanism in the Lepidoptera. Heredity 10: 287-301.
33. Kettlewell HBD. 1973. The Evolution of Melanism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
34. Lees DR. 1981. Industrial melanism: genetic adaptation of animals to air pollution. Pages 129-176 in Bishop JA, Cook LM, eds. Genetic Consequences of Man-made Change. London: Academic Press.
35. Lees DR, Creed ER. 1975. Industrial melanism in Biston betularia: the role of selective predation. Journal of Animal Ecology 44: 67-83.
36. Lees DR, Creed ER, Duckett LG. 1973. Atmospheric pollution and industrial melanism. Heredity 30: 227-232.
37. Liebert TG, Brakefield PM. 1987. Behavioural studies on the peppered moth Biston betularia and a discussion of the role of pollution and lichens in industrial melanism. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 31: 129- 150.
38. Majerus MEN. 1998. Melanism: Evolution in Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
39. Mani GS. 1982. A theoretical analysis of the morph frequency variation in the peppered moth over England and Wales. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 17: 259-267.
40. Mani GS. 1990. Theoretical models of melanism in Biston betularia — a review. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 39: 355-371.
41. Manley TR. 1981. Frequencies of the melanic morph of Biston cognataria (Geometridae) in a low-pollution area of Pennsylvania from 1971 to 1978. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 35: 257-265.
42. Mikkola K. 1984. On the selective forces acting in the industrial melanism of Biston and Oligia moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae and Noctuidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 21: 409-421.
43. Murray ND, Bishop JA, MacNair MR. 1980. Melanism and predation by birds in the moths Biston betularia and Phigalia pilosauria. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 210: 277-283.
44. Owen DF. 1962. The evolution of melanism in six species of North American geometrid moths. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 55: 695-703.
45. Ridley M. 1996. Evolution. 2nd ed. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell Science.
46. Sargent TD. 1974. Melanism in moths of central Massachusetts (Noctuidae, Geometridae). Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 28: 145-152.
47. Sargent TD, Millar CD, Lambert DM. 1998. The “classical” explanation of industrial melanism: assessing the evidence. Evolutionary Biology 30: 299-322.
48. Sheppard PM. 1975. Natural Selection and Heredity. 4th ed. London: Hutchinson University Library.
49. Steward RC. 1977a. Industrial and non-industrial melanism in the peppered moth, Biston betularia (L.). Ecological Entomology 2: 231-243.
50. Steward RC. 1977b. Melanism and selective predation in three species of moths. Journal of Animal Ecology 46: 483-496.
51. Treat AE. 1979. Biston cognataria (Geometridae): frequency of melanic males in Tyringham, Massachusetts, 1958-1977. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 33: 148-149.
52. Tutt JW. 1896. British Moths. London: George Routledge.
53. West DA. 1977. Melanism in Biston (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) in the rural central Appalachians. Heredity 39: 75-81.
54. Wright S. 1978. Evolution and the Genetics of Populations. Volume 4: Variability Within and Among Natural Populations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

WSJ’s article, “Not so Hot” spells it out.

The latest twist in the global warming saga is the revision in data at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, indicating that the warmest year on record for the U.S. was not 1998, but rather 1934 (by 0.02 of a degree Celsius).

Canadian and amateur climate researcher Stephen McIntyre discovered that NASA made a technical error in standardizing the weather air temperature data post-2000. These temperature mistakes were only for the U.S.; their net effect was to lower the average temperature reading from 2000-2006 by 0.15C.

The new data undermine another frightful talking point from environmentalists, which is that six of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 1990. Wrong. NASA now says six of the 10 warmest years were in the 1930s and 1940s, and that was before the bulk of industrial CO2 emissions were released into the atmosphere.

Of course a lot of us have been hip to this for quite some time, but the liberals are still clutching to their faith of the Church of Global Warming with the hopes they can just shove it down our throats. This Hansen fellow is a real piece of work:

James Hansen, NASA’s ubiquitous climate scientist and a man who has charged that the Bush Administration is censoring him on global warming, has been unapologetic about NASA’s screw up. He claims that global warming skeptics – “court jesters,” he calls them — are exploiting this incident to “confuse the public about the status of knowledge of global climate change, thus delaying effective action to mitigate climate change.”

So let’s get this straight: Mr. Hansen’s agency makes a mistake in a way that exaggerates the extent of warming, and this is all part of a conspiracy by “skeptics”? It’s a wonder there aren’t more of them.

This is interesting, passed on to me by Rotty through email, since he knows I always enjoy a good row.

The standoff begins with the Devil’s Kitchen, pointing to a post by Tom Nelson at Climate Resistance who took on the quest for the holy grail; the qualifications of the IPCC “climate experts” whose “science” we aren’t allowed to question. This, because the “debate is over” and the “science is settled”, despite the 400 dissenters that showed up in Bali. The truth of the matter is, The Church of Global Warming doesn’t want to hear any other opinions, which is not science. Science is supposed to be open to honest testing of a hypothesis. The only why you get a real answer is if you’re open to finding out what the truth is. This isn’t the case in terms of the global warming freaks.

So we downloaded IPCC WGII’s latest report on “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”. There were 380 contributors to the report [PDF of contributors].

*snip*

..so we focused on the contributors who operate in the UK. Of the 51 UK contributors to the report, there were 5 economists, 3 epidemiologists, 5 who were either zoologists, entomologists, or biologists. 5 worked in civil engineering or risk management / insurance. 7 had specialisms in physical geography (we gave the benefit of the doubt to some academics whose profiles weren’t clear about whether they are physical or human geographers). And just 10 have specialisms in geophysics, climate science or modelling, or hydrology. But there were 15 who could only be described as social scientists. If we take the view that economics is a social science, that makes 20 social scientists. This gives the lie to Dessler’s claim that IPCC contributors are analogous to medical doctors.

Emphasis mine. HA! Just as in the case of Rachel Carson, the marine biologist, we’re supposed to ignore the real data for the purpose of kneeling at the environmental alter and sacrifice blood and treasure on the basis of lies. This also gives the lie to “climatologists’” claims in general about warming, that we’re not supposed to question the holy writ that comes from the IPCC panel, because they’re the ‘experts’.

We were surprised by the results. Was the prevalence of social scientists from the UK representative of the whole group? We decided to repeat the test for the contributors based in the USA.

Of the 70 US contributors, there were 7 economists, 13 social scientists, 3 epidemiologists, 10 biologists/ecologists, 5 engineers, 2 modellers/statisticians, 1 full-time activist (and 1 part time), 5 were in public health and policy, and 4 were unknowns. 17 worked in earth/atmospheric sciences. Again, we gave the benefit of the doubt to geographers where it wasn’t clear whether their specialism was physical, or human geography.

1 full-time activist and 1 part-time! This blows my mind and is an outrage! I’m certain that the same results would be achieved by going down the entire list, no matter where they’re originally from. This is propaganda masquerading as science!

In a follow-up post, Dessler has set about ‘Busting the ‘consensus busters” by ridiculing the qualifications of Inhofe’s 400 experts, starting with a certain Thomas Ring. In the comments section he justifies this approach:

I agree it would be quicker to simply note the qualified skeptics on the list (there are probably a few dozen), but, from a rhetorical point of view, I think pointing out these immensely unqualified members of the list is more effective.

Ring’s credentials include a degree from Case Western Reserve University in chemical engineering, still more impressive than the ones the IPCC panel has trotted out. This is even MORE amusing:

Well, we can all play that game… Included as contributors to WGII are Patricia Craig, Judith Cranage, Susan Mann, and Christopher Pfeiffer, all from Pennsylvania State University. It’s not that these people aren’t experts in their field - they probably are. Our problem with their inclusion on the list of Contributors to the IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment report is that their jobs are (in order) website-designer, administrative assistant (x2), and network administrator.

YIKES!

Also on the list is Peter Neofotis who appears to be a 2003 graduate of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology from Columbia. Are there many experts in anything who graduated in 2003? Would Dessler take his sick child to a doctor, who, according to our understanding of medical training, would have not yet qualified? Also at Columbia is Marta Vicarelli, who is a PhD candidate in ’sustainable development’. Can she be the amongst the world’s leading experts on sustainability? It seems hard to take the claim seriously. Or what about Gianna Palmer at Wesleyan University, who, as far as we can tell, will not graduate from university until 2010?

Dessler has inadvertently thrown a light on what the real problem is with the agenda-driven IPCC ‘climate’ reports.

And yet Dessler insists that

Inhofe’s list is chock full of people without any recent, relevant research on the problem. In fact, I’m pretty sure that’s why they’re skeptics: people with the relevant experience are immediately persuaded by the evidence. This should be compared to the IPCC, which includes exclusively people with recent, relevant expertise on the problem.

There are, in fact, only about 7,000 climatologists in total, because climate was a stalled profession involving many different disciplines, and climate was considered to be something in constant flux. But still, those that are in Inhofe’s list are at least engineers, instead of administrative assistants, activists, web designers and students who aren’t destined to graduate until 2010, and so on.

Anything which can be thrown at the sceptics can be thrown at IPCC contributors.

That is not to say that social scientists and computer programmers have nothing to offer the world, or the IPCC process. They are crucial in fact. What it is to say, however, is that, when social scientists, computer programmers and administrative assistants comprise a significant proportion of IPCC contributors, the global warmer mantra that the IPCC represents the world’s top 2500 climate scientists is just plain old-fashioned not true.

It’s just a plain old-fashioned LIE, but it’s typical of the pipedreams of leftist environmentalists. Inhofe’s list is comprised of these notable characters:

Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia’s National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa

Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa

Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards

Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.

Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.

Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant

Dr. Andreas Prokoph, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology

Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa

Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.

Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta

Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.

Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria

Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax

Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.

Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta

Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.

Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.

Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary

Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.

Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.

Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists

Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia

Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia

Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review

Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand

Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia

Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville

Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.

Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS

Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland

Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment

Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change

Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey

Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway

Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand

Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001,’ Wellington, N.Z.

Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut

Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.

Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.

Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000

Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service

Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society

Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University

Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.

Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland

Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany

Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland

Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden

Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.

Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.

Dr. Arthur Rorsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health

Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist

Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

Ignoring these people, who are not students destined to graduated in 2010, and whose expertise in the area of science could definitely be greater than that of an administrative assistant, web designer and activists–Dessler concentrated on Thomas Ring, a chemical engineer by training. As if that is an example of someone who’s not ‘qualified’ in comparison with the IPCC nuts behind their exaggerated fictional reports!

DK at the Devil’s Kitchen concludes:

The IPCC are liars and as the whole anthropogenic climate change crap unravels—even on the Left—they cling ever more desperately to their outdated theories by propagating yet more obfuscations, half-truths and outright lies.

Wake up, people!—we are being lied to, and it is so that the political establishment can make complete slaves of us all.

Also see this article at the Wall Street Journal entitled “Not So Hot”.

“meatbrain”- who has his own malicious attachment when you click on his site, steals content and complains when people point out the obvious. His weak response is that everyone else is a “liar”. The other observation about meathead is…he could be Terry Bisson, the Science Fiction writer, whose socialist fantasy stories Kathryn Cramer and David Hartwell have included in their ‘best of’ books.

Meatbrain’s “Numbers Don’t Lie” happens to be a book by Terry Bisson with that title. “Thinking Meat” is a short story penned by him that is so devastingly stupid that you have to wonder how socialists could hold their noses to write about it. But as you can see it all over the net if you google it up, it seems to be pimped all over the internet, and I could see Cramer having a hand in that.

He also joins the far left in his sentiments about Mumia. His book on Mumia is described as a Biography of the world-renowned journalist/death row “political prisoner”.

Terry Bisson is right in the thick of the Who’s Who in American Socialism… . He likes rubbing elbows with the Marxists, Leninists and Stalinists that are trying to destroy our country. Leninists, Marxists and Stalinists are people like Cindy Sheehan’s pals in Code Pink, the anti-war and anti-minutemen demonstrators of International ANSWER, etc., which is probably one of the reasons why he complains so loudly when I point out that the people protesting the war are paid protesters.

The Socialist Scholars Conference has always been an open forum for ideas on the Left. We have never excluded those with whom we disagree.

Yeah right. Take a look at Thinking Meat’s website at Thinkingmeat.net and repeat those two sentences to yourself as you peruse the socialist attack squads.

The chronology of events is rather interesting, as I seem to recall Bisson’s Meatbrain popping up at about the time that Cramer must have been upset about my postings on her fraudulent complaints about my nonexistent collage of pictures of her butt-ugly kid, her pimping posts and covering for Samuel Eddy Reames at Flogging the Simian, her illegally posting a confidentiality agreement between me, her and Jack Idema, her association with Robert Young Pelton and joining in the attack on Jack Idema, her celebrating the death of one of the contractors who were murdered, set on fire and hung from the bridge in Fallujah and fraudulently claiming Michael Teague was a nazi, her problems with Charles Johnson at LGF and reporting him to his hosting company for more trumped-up fiction…her association with Joe Cafasso (as Gerry Blackwood) and pimping Stuporpatriots blog at her site…etc., etc.

The list on Kathryn is very long, and I’ve been considering setting up a section here for her.

The main thing was she was stupid enough to fall for Joe Cafasso when he was pretending to be Gerry Blackwood, and she is out at least $20 grand as a result.

Such is the life of clueless science fiction writers; everything is fantasy; and very little is applicable in the real world. It’s as though they’ve never grown up.

Not relying on historical fact; they have the pipe dream that socialism could work some day if the right people were in charge.

Nebula Awards Weekend from April 2001 shows David Hartwell here…

And Terry Bisson alongside the ridiculously dressed Jon Williams.

Terry Bisson himself looks like something out of a science fiction movie with that evil looking grin, the rosacea, etc.,–but Jon Williams’ outfit looks like something stolen from Liberace’s old Vegas show.

It wouldn’t take much to photoshop Terry Bisson into a monster, LOL…but from what I’ve seen at Thinking Meat dot net, a photoshop isn’t necessary. And so we find out a little more about who the friends of Kathryn Cramer are…not a very impressive lineup.

A prayer for Jack Idema from Fahim:

You fought for the people who were left so behind..You fought for the women who were treated like slaves…You fought for the children who were sexually attacked….You fought for a country and freed it as well…You fought for America to stop the terror…I will pray for you Jack, with my every breath…You are a hero and will be always.

It is customary on Sundays for me to offer up a prayer for Jack and Brent and that they’re both able to return home to the United States safely and without repurcussions from our government for doing the job they were sent to do…

If they’re not appreciated by our own government, it is good to know that Afghanistanis appreciate them for what they did and how they sacrificed for the people and women of Afghanistan.

Trackback with one of your posts that you think deserves some special attention from this past week.

Watch for Open Trackbacks here on Fridays, Sundays and Wednesdays.

Here is the trackback link to this post:

http://caosblog.com/6846/trackback/

To trackback to any post just use the post slug or “permalink” and add trackback/ to the end of it.

One other thing.

I will be deleting trackbacks when the posts don’t show that you’ve linked here. Make sure you do as I did, below–either saying thanks to Cao’s blog and linking to this post, or mention that I have a trackback party, and link to this post. Otherwise the trackback will be deleted.

If you are unable to send trackbacks, then use the Wizbang Standalone Trackback Pinger.

Others holding trackback parties:

Add this Blogroll to your site

This is amusing.

A purely fictitious character, the physical role of “Abu Omar al-Baghdadi” is in fact performed by an Iraqi actor known as Abdullah al-Naima.

Only 200 Mohajeroon (”immigrants”, in Arabic) of the foreign terrorists were left in Iraq as of December 4, 2007. And since it doesn’t appear as though they actually have AQ Iraqi terrorists in Iraq, the whole ‘freedomfighter’ argument goes down the tubes.

I have had a respect for Ron Paul for quite some time, which has turned to …amazement. In addition to the people from stormfront supporting his candidacy for president, we have these weird statements coming from him, which I don’t really know how to take.

The latest is the one where he claims that Fox News is “afraid” of him, and they don’t want him to get his message out.

It’s here at WorldnetDaily.

Ron Paul says Fox News afraid to let him debate
Candidate excluded from N.H. line-up – ‘They don’t want my message to get out’