Monday, June 28, 2010

Maybe now we have to cry over spilled mik

You cannot make this up. The US Environmental Protection Agency has classified milk as an environmental hazard, in fact classifying spilled milk as akin to oil spill.

Having watched the oil gushing in the Gulf of Mexico, dairy farmer Frank Konkel has a hard time seeing how spilled milk can be labeled the same kind of environmental hazard.

But the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is classifying milk as oil because it contains a percentage of animal fat, which is a non-petroleum oil.

The Hesperia farmer and others would be required to develop and implement spill prevention plans for milk storage tanks. The rules are set to take effect in November, though that date might be pushed back.

"That could get expensive quickly," Konkel said. "We have a serious problem in the Gulf. Milk is a wholesome product that does not equate to spilling oil."

But last week environmentalists disagreed at a Senate committee hearing on a resolution from Sen. Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland, calling for the EPA to rescind its ruling.

"The federal Clean Water Act requirements were meant to protect the environment from petroleum-based oils, not milk," he said. "I think it is an example of federal government gone amuck."

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Jack's anti

Jack Welch is anti-climate energy bill.  Here's from Green Hell Blog:

Former GE CEO opposes climate-energy bill

June 16, 2010
Former GE CEO Jack Welch said today on CNBC that:
1. Obama should be focusing on the gulf oil spill “not new energy plans”; and
2. Our “pretty good economy” should not be “damaged” with “carbon taxes.”
“Let’s get [the economy] going,” he said.
Ironically, GE CEO Jeff Immelt and other USCAP CEOs will be pushing the climate bill on Capitol Hill tomorrow at a luncheon prior to the Democratic caucus meeting.
Welch built GE into the largest and most valuable company in the world. Immelt, in contrast, brought GE to the verge of bankruptcy, requiring a $140 billion federal bailout.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Living with dogs

The Philippines's Department of Education will push through with sex education classes in the curriculum. this year.  A group has sued for DepEd to stop.  Forza!

If we give in a bit to this nonsense, they will push for more.  

The US has been at it for a long time.  And the sex ed groups there are getting really daring.  

On another note, First Thoughts has its Ten Reasons to Despise Planned Parenthood.

And Jill has this recent post on the 2010 Abortion Provider Awards.  Sheesh.

Monday, June 21, 2010

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Maggie 2

Lady Margaret on global warming policy, through the eyes of Lord Monckton.
As a former food chemist, she possessed the ruthlessly honest logic of the true scientist. As a former barrister, she had the vigor and articulacy of the true practitioner of the forensic arts. Too many scientists today are in effect politicians: too many politicians pretend to be scientific.

Margaret Thatcher was genuinely both scientist and politician, and was able to take the best from both roles without confusing them. She would not have dreamed of doing anything that in any way undermined the integrity of science.
In her thinking, therefore, there is genuine outrage that the coalescence of financial and political vested-interest factions in the scientific and academic community that are driving the climate scare should be striving to bring the age of enlightenment and reason to an end by treating scientific debate as though every question were a political football to be kicked Leftward.

In the elegant words of my good friend Bob Ferguson of the Science and Public Policy Institute, she is interested not in “policy-based evidence-making” but in “evidence-based policy-making”. The present crop of politicians on both sides of the Atlantic could learn much from her honest, forthright, no-nonsense approach.

Monday, June 14, 2010


Unknown to many, Lady Margaret has been doubting global warming science for many years now.  The reason that few know this is that she was long identified to be a global warming "advocate", in fact one of the first.  When she changed back to the right course, no blip was seen or heard.

She voiced precisely the fundamental doubts about the warming scare that have since become familiar to us. Pouring scorn on the "doomsters", she questioned the main scientific assumptions used to drive the scare, from the conviction that the chief force shaping world climate is CO2, rather than natural factors such as solar activity, to exaggerated claims about rising sea levels. She mocked Al Gore and the futility of "costly and economically damaging" schemes to reduce CO2 emissions. She cited the 2.5C rise in temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period as having had almost entirely beneficial effects. She pointed out that the dangers of a world getting colder are far worse than those of a CO2-enriched world growing warmer. She recognised how distortions of the science had been used to mask an anti-capitalist, Left-wing political agenda which posed a serious threat to the progress and prosperity of mankind.
In other words, long before it became fashionable, Lady Thatcher was converted to the view of those who, on both scientific and political grounds, are profoundly sceptical of the climate change ideology. Alas, what she set in train earlier continues to exercise its baleful influence to this day. But the fact that she became one of the first and most prominent of "climate sceptics" has been almost entirely buried from view.