NEPTUNE JOINS GLOBAL WARMING CLUB and THE NEW YORK TIMES SUCKS

To bring yourself up to speed on today’s item, you may want to see my April 29 blog “’An Inconvenient Truth’ Plays on…Mars?” to see how global warming has caught up to the red planet.

If the Martians had Laurie David on their side, they just may stand a chance. Without Leonardo DiCaprio to save them, the poor Martians, like us hapless humans, will surely become extinct.

Now we have it on serious authority that Neptunians are screwed also! Scientists at the Lowell Observatory in Arizona have been measuring visible light from Neptune and the measurements indicate Neptune has been getting brighter since about 1980. Infrared measurements show the planet has been warming since about the same time.

Researchers have learned that the correlation between solar irradiance, Neptune’s brightness and changes on Earth is nearly perfect.

Seems it kinda goes like this, folks: When the sun’s energy increases, Neptune seems to warm up…as do Mars and Earth. At least that’s the poop appearing on World Climate Report, a climate change blog.

That news, like so much other news contradicting how humans are causing a global warming "crisis" will never make it to the Williams, Couric or Gibson nightly circuses, though. They have way too much invested in convincing us, on a daily basis, that the human species has singlehandedly wiped out an entire planet circling the Sun, the core of an entire solar system, buzzing about in the entire Milky Way galaxy in our little corner of the entire Universe. Wow, we’re powerful!

And there’s so much money to be made on global warming! In this country alone, over a quarter of a trillion dollars has gone from our purses and wallets to global warming research. That’s trillion with a “T”! One more time, that’s 250,000,000,000 dollars from U.S. taxpayers alone!

That quarter of a trillion dollars goes to anyone supporting the global warming agenda by virtually any and all means. If your company says it will research building cogs to be more “environmentally friendly,” then your Congressman will be happy to steal the money and give it to them…In return for a few votes and a campaign contribution, of course.

If your local university has a department dedicated to global warming research, in rolls the grant money. Grants being money taken from us and other possibly productive government projects and given to the school. More votes for your local, selfless Congressman.

Or how about this scenario: The community of Demersville, its governing authority being a responsible, global warming sympathetic group of citizens, paid for by your tax dollars, hires a lobbyist. Said lobbyist is paid for with your tax dollars. Lobbyist goes to the State or Federal government , funded by your tax dollars, to lobby for money, pulled from your pocket, for a project in Demersville that, though unneeded, will go for an environmentally friendly project, funded by you, of course.

So we’re paying a local government (no doubt extremely smart and hard working public servants) paid for by you, to hire a lobbyist, paid for by you, to go to the next level of governments, paid for by you, to get funding, paid for by you, for a project, paid for by you, that obviously isn’t necessary, or it wouldn’t require a lobbyist, paid for by you. Think about it for a minute. You just paid a lot of money to secure several people and things that need to be paid for by a lot more of your money.

And the benefactors? The local government officials who just bought your vote with your money by bringing your money in from the State or Federal government you are funding to pay some contractors for building the “project,” who, in return will send a few bucks to the campaign coffers of your locally elected officials.

Think more than twice when voting for that next new little millage and those tiny increases in the existing millages that populate virtually every election ballot with fuzzy words like Green, Parks, Conservation, Wildlife, Elderly, Education, Rights, Human, Clean, etc.


In a fashion that is actually easily predicted, the New York Times will publish a story on Memorial Day dealing with the dissatisfaction of some troops fighting in Iraq. These stories are legitimate to report and fair game, but in what context? In a piece that tries to paint a picture of discontent among most of the soldiers of Delta Company, The Times goes out of its way to give the impression that most of our troops have doubts about their mission. I could go on and on, but I won’t. I hope most of the public understand the New York Times’ agenda. The Times never seems to appreciate the sacrifices of our men and women in uniform except to exploit them for their own readership. And to choose Memorial Day for this piece…? Unabashedly self serving. It’s easier and easier to understand why their readership is tanking.

How many spirits will they kill today?

I pray all our men and women in arms will have a safe Memorial Day.

JD.