‘Not Evil, Just Wrong’: What’s really at stake with global warming
Point of View By CHARLES COLSON
BreakPoint October 15, 2009
Global warming is a fact of life. Not a fact in a scientific sense. Far from it. But a fact in that it is an issue—an issue that will shape public policy, international relations, and the economies of the world for decades to come.
An eye-opening documentary called Not Evil, Just Wrong: The True Cost of Global Warming Hysteria is being released this week by the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation—an outfit I endorse.
I dare say the film will be controversial because it tackles head on the sacred cows of the man-made global warming crowd.
The film points out that the British High Court ruled in a lawsuit that Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, “is scientifically flawed and has nine significant exaggerations and factual errors.” Among those exaggerations are the claims that sea levels could rise 20 feet by the end of the century, and that polar bears are disappearing because of global warming (in fact, they are not).
Not Evil, Just Wrong also presents a number of scientists and a founding member of the radical environmental organization Greenpeace, who are unafraid to challenge the chief scientific claims behind global warming.
Phi Beta Iota: In the interest of the public's appreciation for the current situation, below are three graphics illustrating the current political situation and issue-bias spread; followed by a list of books with one point: We the People are ready to take our country back from Wall Street and the craven Demopublicans that have sold us out. Joe Biden might possibly be the key to a non-violent restoration of the Constitution, the Republic, and a nation able to integrate strategy, integrity, and living within its means.
Paul Ray's Empty Middle
Paul Ray, co-author of The Cultural Creatives, is probably the finest pollster in America because he cuts deep into values rather than just positions.
With full credit to Michael Crane and his Political Junkies Handbook,which provided the original map of all the political factions (we added the art), the JPEG to the right illustrates the death of democracy at the hands of the two-party tyranny acting Of, By, and For the Banks–the special interests. Every Member now serving, with a tiny handful of exceptions, is CORRUPT, both financially, and in terms of “party line” discipline betraying their constituencies, and in terms of abdicating their Article 1 responsibilities for balancing the power of the Executive. America is not a democracy in Helsinki Accord terms–it is a quasi-fascist corporate state in which the White House is theater, policy is not based on reality, and the budget has been bankrupted several times over because Goldman Sachs has been given free rein over the Treasury for the last four Administrations.
Robert Baer, a former CIA field operative says, “The notion that we're in Afghanistan to make our country safer is just complete bullshit… what it's doing is causing us greater danger, no question about it. Because the more we fight in Afghanistan, the more the conflict is pushed across the border into Pakistan, the more we destabilize Pakistan, the more likely it is that a fundamentalist government will take over the army — and we'll have Al-Qaeda like groups with nuclear weapons.”
Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops. . . . . . .
Full Story Online
Why Joe Biden Should Resign
Citing a Newsweek story: “Can I just clarify a factual point? How much will we spend this year on Afghanistan?” Someone provided the figure: $65 billion. “And how much will we spend on Pakistan?” Another figure was supplied: $2.25 billion. “Well, by my calculations that's a 30-to-1 ratio in favor of Afghanistan. So I have a question. Al Qaeda is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. And yet for every dollar we're spending in Pakistan, we're spending $30 in Afghanistan. Does that make strategic sense?” The White House Situation Room fell silent.
We have not featured “think tanks” on this web site because all of them, with one exception, are ideologically biased and financially-beholden to one of the two parties that monopolize power and exclude both the majority of Americans from an honest electoral process, and the majority of objective experts from the policy and budget dailog.
The CATO Institute appears to be an exception. Below are a few of their generally dated but still relevant pronouncements on the subject of intelligence as decision support.
For the last hundred years, rightsholders have fretted about everything from the player piano to the VCR to digital TV to Napster. Here are those objections, in Big Content's own words.
By Nate Anderson | Last updated October 11, 2009 10:00 PM CT
It's almost a truism in the tech world that copyright owners reflexively oppose new inventions that do (or might) disrupt existing business models. But how many techies actually know what rightsholders have said and written for the last hundred years on the subject?
