Monday, January 5, 2009

Are Liberals Getting Smarter? Let's Hope So

By Alan Caruba

Something quite extraordinary happened on Saturday, January 3rd. The Huffington, a bastion of liberal thought, published a commentary by Harold Ambler that demanded an apology from Al Gore for all the lies he’s been telling about “global warming” or, as the alarmists now call it, “climate change.”

Ambler’s lengthy commentary was jam-packed with solid scientific data about what actually warms or cools the Earth, neatly dispatching the “climate change” verbiage by noting that climate change is a redundancy. “The climate has always changed and always will.” This was followed by a list of the many known periods of warming and cooling that have occurred during the Holocene period that had marked the rise of human civilization. “The lie is that the climate has ever been stable.”

“The theory that carbon dioxide ‘drives’ climate in any meaningful way is simply wrong and, again, evidence of a ‘flat-Earth’ mentality,” said Ambler, turning the accusation that global warming critics are “flat-Earthers” or just “deniers” into a description of Gore and his associates.

Ambler then launched into a serious explanation of the forces that actually impact the Earth’s warming and cooling cycles. He noted, for example, that “Many solar physicists anticipate that the slumbering Sun of early 2009 is likely to continue for at least two solar cycles, or about the next 25 years” in which there will be little or no sunspot activity.” This always correlates to a colder Earth.

Ambler’s commentary ( is extraordinary for two reasons. First, he used the same data that has been available for years on the numerous Internet sites visited mostly by conservatives and he holds Al Gore up for the scorn he richly deserves. He does this for a politically and socially liberal audience of readers.

There are cracks in the liberal wall of lies beginning to appear in other liberal media. On the same day Ambler’s commentary appeared, the Star Ledger, the largest circulation daily newspaper in New Jersey, published an editorial, “End ethanol experiment.” The push to require that gasoline include ethanol as a way to reduce dependency on oil imports (some 60% at this point) has always ignored the fact that it requires that food products, primarily corn and soy, be turned into fuel and that drives up the cost of food and animal feed worldwide while simultaneously reducing the mileage from every gallon of a gasoline/ethanol mix.

As the Star Ledger editorial noted, “Americans loved the idea of a clean, green fuel that could take the place of petroleum.” The problem was that ethanol could never replace gasoline, a petroleum derivative. The environmental impact of the ethanol mandates imposed by Congress was to encourage deforestation elsewhere in order to plant more corn.

The editorial noted that “environmentalists will have a major influence on the incoming Obama administration. New Jersey residents have reason to hope that influence will be sufficient to overcome the influence of the corn states in Congress.” That is wishful thinking because the ethanol and biofuel problem was created by environmentalists who hate oil with a passion.

The real hope is that enough liberals will begin to be exposed to and seriously examine the lies they have been told by environmentalists and will begin to reject congressional bans on exploration and extraction of oil in ANWR and the continental shelf off our vast east and west coasts. They need, too, to reject the lies about “dirty” coal or “dangerous” nuclear power.

Perhaps when liberals get cold enough and electrical power become unstable, they may conclude that conservatives were telling the truth.


Guy said...

Interesting ... the way I see this, the Obama camp has realized that they have no hope of paying for all this senseless "green" stuff, so rather than have the Messiah try to explain why he can't keep all his enviro-promises, they've started eating their own and throwing people under the bus. The cracks have begun to appear in the fantasy world the liberals live in ... now it only remains to be seen where they go from here. If they do the same thing with all their tax increases and other ridiculous promises, I suppose it won't be a bad thing, and some people we've wanted to see discredited will go down hard in the process. Maybe we can scratch Gore off your list before Obama even takes office!!!

Alan Caruba said...

These are the same people who just proposed Leon Panetta to head the CIA even though he has zero experience with the spy business. Already a highly political entity, the Obama folks want to make it plain as day how political it really is. As for protecting the U.S., I think that is way down on the CIA 'to-do' list these days.

Gramfan said...

The recent pieces on HuffPo have not gone unnoticed in the 'blogosphere.

One on "Global Warming", and two pro-Israel ones,,or about as pro-Israel as one would expect.

Lots of theories abound. I think Guy has mentioned the main one.

Clive Graham Smale said...

Yes, a trult great article by Harold Ambler. I wonder if it will be brought to the attention of the Great Messiah, himself?
By now the warmists are feeling the chill wind of a rising disbelief as more scientists, broadcasters and others are seen to be 'coming-out' publicly against AGW.
To keep their hoax - and grant cash streams alive - the warmists are turning their belief system on its head. According to the UK Daily Telegraph, today (06 Jan) a new study would have us believe that global warming could have pushed us into an ice-age some millions of years ago. The University of Birmingham in the UK warned that glaciation could happen again if AGW is not 'curbed'. So now we have it, AGW = AGC, a classic case of CYA. So instead of roasting on a scorched and barren earth we are now to expect freezing our parts off - all because of AGW, or is it AGC?
The death throes of the warmists are producing an ideology more incredulous with every press release. The wider public is seeing through the sham and it is reflected in the MSM comments to these stories. In the 'Daily Telegraph', today, all comments to this story were scathing. To reinforce just how the AGW ideology is collapsing in the public perception the UK's 'Daily Mail' newspaper conducted an on-line poll. The question: 'Do you believe in global warming?' 17% said yes but a resounding 83% said NO!
I think the warmist will follow in the footsteps of the cigarette companies. As the better informed and educated West refuses to embrace a harmful product or ideology so its promulgators move to a less informed and less educated part of the world more receptive to their message.
Anyway, it appears that the Al Gore roadshow is now on the skids. Good riddance, I say.

ZZMike said...

I notice a few cries of outrage at the HuffPo, responding to Ambler's piece. But none of them seem to do a serious rebuttal - they only cry "heretic!" and refer people to Authorized Sites from the Church of Global Warming, and attack his credentials - after all he's not an "accredited climate scientist" (as Mr Gore presumably is).

Guy said...

The Huffington Post is back peddaling big time on Harold Ambler's post, now that the liberals are beside themselves after reading it on THEIR blog. Adrianna Huffington is claiming that it only got posted because she didn't read it before she passed it on to an associate, who published it in error. According to Adrianna, Global Warming is a fact, and there are "not two sides to every story" .... That's a very interesting position for a journalist to take isn't it? With each and every passing day, journalism continues to wither and die. I was always taught that there ARE two sides to every story, and before you report, you're supposed to get your facts straight. I guess they aren't teaching those things any more ...

Alan Caruba said...

Why am I not surprised that HuffPost is backpeddling? I was surprised when they published the anti-Gore piece. They must have gotten a ton of negative feedback.

Rich Kozlovich said...

Moonbats will always be Moonbats. Huffington is no exception. Just because she had a momentary lapse of clarity doesn't change that fact.

Her whole backpedaling account of events are an example that she isn't very competent, she isn't very smart, she lacks courage and that money can buy you prominence if you tout the right line!

Even if you are from another planet.

Rich Kozlovich said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.