Sunday, December 19, 2010

December 18, 2010

The latest snowfall carpeted large swathes of Britain today - with up to 5in falling in places - paralysing roads and rail, and forcing airports and schools to close.

Forecasters warned the worst was still to come over the next 24 hours as the heaviest December snowfall for 30 years tightened its grip on the nation once more.

The South is expected to be worst hit with up to 10in falling during the course of tomorrow. By the start of next week temperatures are set to fall to as low as -15c (5f).

Met Office forecaster Barry Gromett said the average mean temperature for the first two weeks of this month was -0.7c.

The coldest ever average for this time of year - recorded in December 1981 - was 0.2c.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339149/Big-freeze-Temperatures-plummet-10C-bringing-travel-chaos-Britain.html#ixzz18cYp0SXi
Flashback

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

By Charles Onians

Monday, 20 March 2000

SPONSORED LINKS
Ads by Google

It's Winter, Be Prepared
Get Your Generator At Norwall Now!Free Shipping, Residential Delivery
www.Norwall.com

$10 off Christmas Plants
Deck the Halls with Fresh ChristmasPlants. Same Day Local Delivery.
www.Teleflora.com

Stop Shoveling the Roof!
Prevent Snow Build Up & Leaky RoofsWith A New Metal Roof from Advanced
www.AdvancedSidingAndWindow.com

Holiday Mussel Recipes
Improve Your Holiday Health.Find Low-Fat Holiday Recipes Here!
DiscoverMussels.com/Holidays

Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.

Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.

Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.

The first two months of 2000 were virtually free of significant snowfall in much of lowland Britain, and December brought only moderate snowfall in the South-east. It is the continuation of a trend that has been increasingly visible in the past 15 years: in the south of England, for instance, from 1970 to 1995 snow and sleet fell for an average of 3.7 days, while from 1988 to 1995 the average was 0.7 days. London's last substantial snowfall was in February 1991.

Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community. Average temperatures in Britain were nearly 0.6°C higher in the Nineties than in 1960-90, and it is estimated that they will increase by 0.2C every decade over the coming century. Eight of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the Nineties.

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

The effects of snow-free winter in Britain are already becoming apparent. This year, for the first time ever, Hamleys, Britain's biggest toyshop, had no sledges on display in its Regent Street store. "It was a bit of a first," a spokesperson said.

Fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks. Malcolm Robinson, of the Fenland Indoor Speed Skating Club in Peterborough, says they have not skated outside since 1997. "As a boy, I can remember being on ice most winters. Now it's few and far between," he said.

Michael Jeacock, a Cambridgeshire local historian, added that a generation was growing up "without experiencing one of the greatest joys and privileges of living in this part of the world - open-air skating".

Warmer winters have significant environmental and economic implications, and a wide range of research indicates that pests and plant diseases, usually killed back by sharp frosts, are likely to flourish. But very little research has been done on the cultural implications ofclimate change - into the possibility, for example, that our notion of Christmas might have to shift.

Professor Jarich Oosten, an anthropologist at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, says that even if we no longer see snow, it will remain culturally important.

"We don't really have wolves in Europe any more, but they are still an important part of our culture and everyone knows what they look like," he said.

David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes - or eventually "feel" virtual cold.

Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said.

The chances are certainly now stacked against the sortof heavy snowfall in cities that inspired Impressionist painters, such as Sisley, and the 19th century poet laureate Robert Bridges, who wrote in "London Snow" of it, "stealthily and perpetually settling and loosely lying".

Not any more, it seems.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Mark Tapscott: Oh the horror! Fox bureau chief told reporters to be 'skeptical'

You think the most essential purpose of journalism and the reason the Founders included freedom of the press in the First Amendment was to insure independent reporting about government, politicians, and public policy issues, right?

Well, you must be wrong because Fox News Washington Bureau Chief Bill Sammon is getting a raft of garbage from liberal activists masquerading as journalists at Media Matters, some liberal bloggers and a scattering of real journalists who ought to know better.

Why? Politico’s headline captures the controversy perfectly: “Fox editor urged climate skepticism.”

A journalist being skeptical? Who would ever have thought such a thing could be. I don’t know, maybe anybody who has heard this (attributed long ago to a crusty desk editor at the illustrious City News Bureau in Chicago): “If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out.”

In other words, we journalists are paid to BE SKEPTICAL.

For the record, here’s what Sammon said in a Dec. 8, 2009, memo to his reporting staff shortly after the Climategate global warming email scandal erupted:

“Given the controversy over the veracity of climate change data, we should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question. It is not our place as journalists to assert such notions as facts, especially as this debate intensifies.”

Now I am from out of town and all, but Sammon’s injuction sounds to me exactly like what editors are supposed to tell their charges – report what A claims and what B says about what A claims, but keep your personal views about both A and B out of it.

Note that Sammon includes both those who say the planet has warmed – i.e. global warming advocates – and those who claim the opposite, that the planet has cooled – global warming critics. How much more even-handed – dare I say it, fair and balanced? – can the guy be?

There is also the factual nature of Sammon’s statement that critics question data. Critics DO question the data for a warming planet. He doesn’t demand that his reporters agree with the critics about the data or tell viewers that the critics are right and the global warming advocates are wrong.

Yet, Salon’s headline claims the Fox news executive was “again caught demanding conservative spin.” And the lead that follows makes another false statement, claiming Sammon directed his “anchors and reporters to adopt right-wing spin when discussing the news.”

Are these people so arrogant as to think the rest of us are too stupid to see that Salon totally and completely misrepresented Sammon’s comment?

The back story here, of course, is that Media Matters is doing exactly what billionaire radical liberal financier George Soros paid it $1 million to do, which is to trash Fox News at every opportunity no matter what the facts might be in any given situation.

Watching this campaign unfold, it becomes clear that Fox News drives today’s extremist liberals into the same sort of eye-bulging, irrational, spittle-flying, blind rage that we saw back in the 1950s from the far right whack-jobs in the John Birch Society who claimed Ike was either a fool or a card-carrying commie.

Now, just so everybody reading this knows: Sammon is a former White House reporter for The Examiner. I count him as a friend, a respected colleague and a solid journalist. And Fox News puts me in front of a camera as a talking head once in a while.

So how long you think it will be before Sammon’s critics claim my comments here aren't credible as a result? The reality is that the left-leaning MSNBC folks sit me down in front of their cameras to bloviate far more frequently than Fox does. Go figure.

So here's something to ponder when the paid Fox detractors at Media Matters tell you Sammon and I are both former Washington Timesmen and are thus Republican mouthpieces:

I was inducted into the First Amendment Center’s Freedom of Information Hall of Fame a few years ago. I mention this not to boast, but because I was among a bunch of very smart people for whom I have great respect - even though they came predominantly from the liberal side of things.

But I don’t recall seeing anybody from Media Matters among the inductees.



Read more at the Washington Examiner:http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2010/12/mark-tapscott-oh-horror-fox-bureau-chief-told-reporters-be-skeptical#ixzz18F98Ycw5

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

A coveted benefit, a failure to follow up

As federal disability aid for poor children increasingly targets the very young, required case reviews to ensure the help is necessary or appropriate have dwindled to an alarming degree

This Boston Globe story highlights a very well intended program that is abused, poorly regulated or monitored, and saps motivation from the parents receiving the easy money.

http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/12/13/follow_up_process_lacking_in_ssi_disability_program/

The U.S. Should Halt All Funding For U.N.'s 'Global Warming' Scam

The global warming prophets and propagandists, who enjoy living in style on other people's money, gathered last month in the plush resort of Cancun, Mexico, where January temperatures usually hover around 80 degrees. God must have a sense of humor because Cancun was hit by its coldest temperature in a hundred years.

The first day of the conference featured an address from Mexico's President Felipe Calderon, who spoke with much concern about global warming and the damage that humans are perpetrating on the planet.

He cited the deaths of 60 people in Mexico because of weather extremes, but didn't mention Mexico's 22,000 deaths caused by the illegal drug trade.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced that "we need to fundamentally transform the global economy, based on low-carbon, clean-energy resources." Barack Obama's announced goal of fundamentally transforming the United States has morphed into transforming the world.

This 16th annual conference of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), called COP 16 (Conference of the Parties 16), attracted some 20,000 delegates from 194 countries.

It had little to do with any science about climate change and everything to do with trying to get the United States and other industrialized nations to redistribute their wealth to the poorer nations under the supervision of eager United Nations bureaucrats.

Like previous climate change conferences, COP 16 deliberately pitted the poor countries against the rich countries, encouraging the poor countries to demand what the rich countries have without earning or paying for it.

This is the internationalist version of the basic Marxist tactic called the class war.

COP 16 propagandists blame every human tragedy on the high standard of living enjoyed (and earned) by the rich countries.

Our over-consumption is alleged to cause global warming. We are guilty because we are prosperous, so we supposedly owe reparations to the poor nations.

At COP 15 in Copenhagen a year ago, the poor countries ganged up on us and agreed that the United States should create a $30 billion "Fast Start" global climate fund by 2012 and reduce U.S. greenhouse gases by 17% below the 2005 levels.

This Fast Start climate fund would be committed to grow to $100 billion by 2020.

Fortunately, the Copenhagen proposals were never formally adopted. President Obama came and left empty-handed, Communist China refused to limit its emissions, and the Third World dictators didn't get the $100 billion handouts they expected.

The poor countries now say they want cash handouts, not loans, because they don't want to take on any debt. They also floated a scheme to force 37 industrialized nations to transfer their technologies along with huge financial bonuses to the poorer 155 nations.

Donations to the Fast Start Fund are not coming in as rapidly as the avaricious countries want, so COP 16 participants decided it's time to call for a global tax.

They want it to be unlimited in scope and unlinked to national treasuries so that tax receipts can flow without the nuisance of having to be approved by the rich countries' legislatures.

The U.N. Secretary General's High Level Advisory Group confirmed that the goal is to impose taxes on international shipping, aviation and financial transactions involving stocks, bonds and foreign exchanges, as well as a carbon tax.

Those taxes could raise at least $100 billion annually, and the International Maritime Organization is ready to be the assessor-collector.

COP 16 agitators consider all these payments compensatory for damages caused by the rich nations. The World Wildlife Foundation estimates that the amounts needed to protect against climate change will run to $160 billion to $200 billion yearly by 2020.

COP 16's bag of tricks also includes plans for global governance.

The new UNFCCC executive secretary, Christiana Figueres, said that COP 16 "is a litmus test for global governance capacity" and that "Cancun will be successful if governments compromise" by launching "a new era."

The poor nations at COP 16 presented a document called "Declaration From the South-South Summit on Climate Justice and Finance."

It claimed that climate change is "an economic and social crisis, a political crisis, a food and energy crisis, and an ecological crisis."

This diatribe called for "climate justice, ecological justice, economic justice, gender justice and historical justice." Its presenters concluded by chanting, "Let's globalize the struggle!"

The main cause of poverty in other countries is the lack of enough energy. We should be increasing the use of energy rather than expanding government powers to restrict energy.

Tell your newly elected members of Congress that we reject all COP 16 demands as well as the insulting proposition that our successful economic system caused the world's poverty.

If poor countries want to be rich, the way to go is to follow our American model for success, freedom and prosperity.

• Schlafly is a lawyer, conservative political analyst and the author of the newly revised and expanded "Supremacists."

Thursday, June 24, 2010

The media had the story on Al Gore's sex scandal issue two years ago. The Inquirer finally breaks it.
JUNE 24--In a bizarre statement to police, the Oregon woman who claims that Al Gore fondled and groped her during a massage session described the former Vice President as a giggling "crazed sex poodle" who gave a "come hither" look before pouncing on her in a Portland hotel suite. In a taped January 2009 interview with cops, the 54-year-old woman, a licensed masseuse whose name has been redacted from police records, read from a lengthy prepared statement that detailed her alleged October 2006 encounter with Gore at the Hotel Lucia.

And-

A top aide to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he believed Barack Obama knew of Blagojevich's plot to win himself a presidential Cabinet post in exchange for appointing Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate.

John Harris, Blagojevich's former chief of staff, testified Wednesday in the former governor's corruption trial that three days after the Nov. 4, 2008, presidential election, the ex-governor told Harris he felt confident Obama knew he wanted to swap perks.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Democrats still don’t get it, and they refuse to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government mortgage companies that sparked the meltdown by giving high-risk loans to people who couldn’t afford it. Standing up for American taxpayers, CNBC’s on-air editor, Rick Santelli teed off on Rep. Paul Kanjorski’s (D-PA) claim that Democrats’ couldn’t reform Fannie & Freddie in their financial regulation bill because it was “too complicated,” asking: “It’s too complicated? You think taxpayers that go to work to pay the money you are subsidizing, it will end up a half a trillion, do you think they think complicated is an excuse?



The exchange couldn’t have come at a worse time for Rep. Kanjorski and Congressional Democrats, because Fannie and Freddie simply won’t go away. As the Financial Times reported today:

“Fannie Mae said on Monday it would need an additional $8.4bn in aid, as the US government-controlled mortgage finance company continued to suffer heavy losses on its bad loans…Fannie Mae’s appeal for help comes on the heels of a similar plea last week by smaller rival Freddie Mac, which asked for an additional $10.6bn cash infusion. The latest requests for aid bring the total amount of taxpayer dollars drawn down by these companies to $148bn since the 2008 government-led bail-out.

“Anthony Sanders, a senior scholar at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, called Fannie and Freddie ‘our own Greek tragedy.’ Mr. Sanders estimated that total taxpayer liability was about $8,000bn for the combined companies, including public debt and loan guarantees
.”


But the unlimited bailout that the Administration has bestowed on Fannie and Freddie doesn’t seem to bother Democrats, though the latest giveaway may come at an “inconvenient time,” as the New York Times noted today:

“Fannie Mae’s request on Monday for another $8.4 billion in federal aid comes at a politically inconvenient time for the Obama administration, which is pressing to pass sweeping financial legislation without resolving the company’s future…. Democrats want to defer an overhaul of federal housing policy until next year, after the midterm elections. But Republicans have seized on the continuing losses to argue that a plan for the two companies should be a priority of the current legislation.”

Republicans have been pressing for an end to bailouts that would get the government out of the mortgage business once and for all. But Democrats are not only unwilling to reform Fannie and Freddie, they are doubling down on the failed government mortgage companies – burning through hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in the process. As the Washington Post noted in a report today: “Under the terms of the government's 2008 emergency takeover of Fannie and Freddie, the Treasury must pump money into either firm whenever its worth, as measured by assets minus liabilities, goes into the red. Late last year, the Obama administration pledged unlimited backing.”

For years, Republicans raised red flags about Fannie and Freddie’s financial condition and proposed responsible reforms only to be thwarted by Democrats who have deep political ties to the worst offenders. These same powerful Democrats are now pushing for a financial reform bill that doesn’t even address the need to fix these government mortgage companies. As the Wall Street Journal wrote last week, “reforming the financial system without fixing Fannie and Freddie is like declaring a war on terror and ignoring al Qaeda.”

House Republicans’ plan would phase out taxpayer subsidies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over a number of years and end the current model of privatized profits and taxpayer losses.

Monday, May 10, 2010

I graduation speech over the weekend, Obama states that to much information hurts democracy.

"Meanwhile, you're coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't rank all that high on the truth meter. With iPods and iPads; Xboxes and PlayStations; information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment. All of this is not only putting new pressures on you; it is putting new pressures on our country and on our democracy."

Yahoo article:

President Obama, who ran the most tech-savvy presidential campaign in history, took a surprisingly hard line against Apple products Sunday in a graduation speech that touched on the importance of education in a world being revolutionized by technology.

"With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation," Obama told graduates at historically black Hampton University in Virginia on Sunday.

"All of this is not only putting new pressures on you. It is putting new pressures on our country and on our democracy."

Obama is certainly the most tech-savvy president we've had. His presidential campaign used YouTube, mass texting, Facebook and blogs to energize grass-roots support in an unprecedented way. During the campaign, Obama was photographed using an iPhone (he nowuses a BlackBerry), and his wife, Michelle, said she bought the family MacBooks so they could stay in touch while he was on the road, an Apple fan site gleefully noted.

All of which makes it surprising that Obama not only suggested he didn't know how to use iPods and iPads in his speech, but also criticized them for turning users into a powerless audience that consumes instead of creates.

Obama's remarks echo those of some technology critics when theiPad went on sale in April. Canadian tech blogger Cory Doctorow called the device "infantilizing," and media critic Jeff Jarvis said it was controlling consumers by turning them back into a passive audience. Both dislike that the company sells only Apple-made applications, instead of using open-source software.

"That is why media companies and advertisers are embracing [the iPad] so fervently," Jarvis wrote, "because they think it returns us all to their good old days when we just consumed, we didn't create, when they controlled our media experience and business models and we came to them."