Heat Wave Wisconsin

It is so hot and humid I can't stand it. And the heat wave is just beginning.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A dangerous heat wave is hitting the region and officials have issued three weather-related warnings and advisories for Milwaukee and surrounding counties.

Sunday afternoon, the National Weather Service expanded its excessive heat warning , which started at noon and is set to last through Sunday night for south central and southeast Wisconsin.

The weather service issued a heat advisory for Ozaukee, Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha counties until 10 p.m. Monday. High temperatures are expected to be 90 to 95 degrees with heat index values between 100 and 105.

In addition, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has issued an air quality advisory for ozone for Sheboygan, Ozaukee, Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha counties, which will remain in effect until 11 p.m. Sunday. Sensitive groups, including children, the elderly, and people with respiratory or heart problems and people engaged in strenuous outdoor activities are urged to take precautions to avoid illness.

The heat warning, which is valid until 10 p.m., means heat index values are expected to reach between 100 and 110 in the afternoon and early evening hours in the counties away from Lake Michigan.

The weather service warned that the combination of hot temperatures and high humidity are part of a "dangerous heat wave" that can cause heat illnesses.

"The hot and humid weather can cause heat-related health problems for anyone working or spending time outdoors or without air conditioning. The very young, the elderly and pets will be especially vulnerable," the service said in the warning. "Drink plenty of fluids, stay in an air-conditioned room, stay out of the sun, and check up on relatives and neighbors."

Whatever happened to Ozone Action days?

Remember these steps we were encouraged to take during hot spells when the air would be stagnant?

Travel Tips -

1. Limit driving. Defer errands or share a ride. For short trips, walk or ride a bike.
2. If you drive, avoid excessive idling or jack-rabbit starts.
3. Take transit. Ride the bus or train to work, school, or shopping.
4. Don't Refuel on an Ozone Action Day. If you must refuel, do so after 7 pm.
5. Avoid using gasoline powered equipment, such as outboard motors and off-road vehicles.

Home Tips -

1. Defer mowing your lawn until late evening or the next day. Also, avoid usin gother gasoline-powered garden equipment.
2. Postpone using oil-based paints, solvents, or varnishes.
3. Use an electric starter or charcoal chimney rather than lighter fluid.
4. Defer use of household consumer products that release fumes or evaporate easily.
5. Conserve energy to reduce energy needs from power plants.

Alas, Ozone Action Days are history in Wisconsin.

A survey of the Ozone Action Day program in the summer of 1995 revealed that over 80 percent of respondents were aware of the program. The survey results also showed that 70 percent of respondents said they took action. Of these, 69 percent postponed mowing the lawn and 47 percent filled a gas tank in the evening.

Both regulatory and voluntary actions have reduced pollution over time and the air has become healthier as a result. But as scientists and health specialists learn more about pollution and its impacts on our bodies, they realized two changes were needed – the health standards needed to be tightened and we needed to control finer, smaller particles, which cause serious health problems. Air pollution episodes due to fine particle pollution can occur anywhere in the state and at any time of year. Thus, Wisconsin needed to change its public notification system beyond Ozone Action Days.

When pollution levels are too high, Wisconsin now calls Air Quality Advisories instead of Ozone Action Days.

I don't get why there no longer is an emphasis on getting individuals to personally take action, altering their behavior.

If the suggestions were effective, why have they been dropped?

Air Quality Advisories warn the public about conditions, but there's no call to action anymore.

It doesn't make sense.

Did I mention it's so hot and humid that I can't stand it?

It's sweltering.

This is going to be a long week.

Light Bulb Ban

Don't tread on my light bulbs!

From The Foundry:

The House of Representatives is expected to vote on the BULB Act this week, which was introduced by Representatives Joe Barton (R–TX), Michael Burgess (R–TX) and Marsha Blackburn (R–TN). The legislation would repeal Subtitle B of Title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007—the phase-out of the incandescent bulb as we know it. The light bulb ban has become a symbolic representation of the federal government’s intrusion into the American individual’s freedom.

The insinuation behind energy efficiency standards—not just for light bulbs, but for vehicles, appliances, and buildings—is that consumers don’t know what’s best for them. This is clear in what critics are saying about the repeal of the light bulb ban.

Former Senator John Warner (R–VA) said, “We’ll be dropping backwards in America’s need to become more energy-efficient.” Yet when you take a look at America’s energy efficiency track record, it’s not too shabby—and it’s a result of innovation and cost reduction, not government mandates and regulations. Overall, energy consumption per real dollar of gross domestic product has dropped dramatically in the past 60 years, because we’ve innovated and become drastically more efficient in the process.

Interestingly, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said of the legislation, “We are taking away a choice that continues to let people waste their own money.”

Then why stop with light bulbs? Store-brand cola is much cheaper than Coke or Pepsi. The same is true for cereal, vegetables, and most other products found at a grocery store. Why not mandate that consumers buy the cheaper of the two to save money? Would the same politicians argue that consumers are wasting their money when they buy Coke instead of generic cola?

The difference between these examples and the energy efficiency standard is that Congress is mandating higher sticker prices on lighting with the assumption that it will save consumers money (through cheaper electricity bills) in the long run. But consumers are not stupid. If the more expensive bulbs were truly better in the long run, people would buy them.

...People consider several variables—not just the sticker price— when buying a product.

...Consumers prefer incandescent bulbs for a number of reasons. Many prefer the soft yellow lighting of incandescents to the unnatural, office-like white light of fluorescents. Residents in houses with wells and septic systems use the heat from incandescent bulbs to keep the water above freezing. Others prefer not to deal with the lengthy cleanup process that comes with broken CFLs, because they contain mercury. There are plenty of reasons consumers buy incandescents, and there’s no good reason for the government to restrict that choice.

Read "How Many Hazmat Suits Does It Take to Change a Light Bulb?"

Earth Day and DDT

Happy Earth Day 2011!

This year's theme is "A Billion Acts of Green."

I think people should behave responsibly when it comes to the environment.

I believe that we are stewards of God's creation and must care for the Earth. I believe that we are called to protect the environment and not abuse the gift that it is. However, that goal cannot take precedence over caring for human life.

It's a sad reality, but the environmental movement kills.

Let's talk about Rachel Carson and the impact she has had on the lives of millions of people, causing suffering and death.

Because of Rachel Carson, bad science, and politics decades ago, millions and millions of people needlessly have died of malaria.

Their deaths were preventable - not by the use of mosquito nets, but by the application of DDT.

The banning of DDT is a tragic example of what happens when politics and environmentalism run amok.

I think of Al Gore and his hero, Rachel Carson.

The banning of DDT wasn't a victory. It was a death sentence for millions of people. Literally.

It was bad science. It was bad politics.

From the 1998 PBS Frontline report, "Fooling with Mother Nature":

On the walls of the US vice president's office, you might expect to see framed photos of political giants past and present. Amidst his collection, however, Al Gore cherishes a picture of a biologist from Western Pennsylvania - Rachel Carson, author of "Silent Spring." Why does an unassuming scientist lay claim to this space? "For me personally," says Gore in his introduction to the 1992 edition of her book, "Silent Spring had a profound impact ... Indeed, Rachel Carson was one of the reasons that I became so conscious of the environment and so involved with environmental issues ... Carson has had as much or more effect on me than any, and perhaps than all of them together."

Carson's Silent Spring killed and continues to kill.

So many of Carson's claims have been refuted.

Read a sampling of the debunking of Silent Spring.

Why The Insecticide DDT Should Never Have Been Banned

Killing People - The banning of DDT and radical environmentalists

Malaria Foundation International

The Lies of Rachel Carson

Bring Back DDT, and Science With It!

The latter is a 2002 piece by Marjorie Mazel Hecht. It provides a concise overview of Carson's illegitimate assertions and the consequences of the hysteria that she launched.

The 1972 U.S. ban on DDT is responsible for a genocide 10 times larger than that for which we sent Nazis to the gallows at Nuremberg. It is also responsible for a menticide which has already condemned one entire generation to a dark age of anti-science ignorance, and is now infecting a new one.

The lies and hysteria spread to defend the DDT ban are typical of the irrationalist, anti-science wave which has virtually destroyed rational forms of discourse in our society. If you want to save science—and human lives—the fight to bring back DDT, now being championed by that very electable candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination, Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., had better be at the top of your agenda.

Sixty million people have died needlessly of malaria, since the imposition of the 1972 ban on DDT, and hundreds of millions more have suffered from this debilitating disease. The majority of those affected are children. Of the 300 to 500 million new cases of malaria each year, 200 to 300 million are children, and malaria now kills one child every 30 seconds. Ninety percent of the reported cases of malaria are in Africa, and 40 percent of the world’s population, inhabitants of tropical countries, are threatened by the increasing incidence of malaria.

...The campaign to ban DDT got its start with the publication of Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring in 1962. Carson’s popular book was a fraud. She played on people’s emotions, and to do so, she selected and falsified data from scientific studies... .

Does that sound a bit extreme?

Are you thinking that I'm citing sources that lack credibility?

Do you need a source that you can identify as enlightened, sophisticated, and acceptable to the liberal mindset?

OK.

Read "What the World Needs Now Is DDT."

It's by Tina Rosenberg and was published in The New York Times on April 11, 2004.

It appears that Rachel Carson, Al Gore's inspiration, sparked a movement that cost millions of lives.

What the world needs now is DDT.

And look at the topic of Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl's April 21, 2010, e-mail message:

On April 22, 1970, 20 million Americans paused for a day to celebrate our planet and press for the urgent actions needed to preserve and protect it. As we observe this 40th anniversary of the first Earth Day, we once again reflect on the necessity of a clean and safe environment, celebrate the successes of the last four decades, and consider the long way we still must go to achieve the goals laid out that day.

In Wisconsin, we also stop to remember and honor one of our most prominent citizens.

Earth Day was born out of the passion of Gaylord Nelson. His life was one of service – from the Pacific theater during World War II, to the State House as a State Senator and Governor, and to Washington D.C. where he served Wisconsin as a U.S. Senator for nearly 20 years.

When Gaylord came to Washington, he did so with a mission to bring environmental causes to the forefront of the national debate. He believed that the cause of environmentalism needed as much attention as national defense. For his first years in the Senate, his cause was lonely. In 1966, his bill to ban the pesticide DDT garnered no cosponsors.

Gaylord knew that only with the grassroots support of regular Americans, could the environmental agenda rise to prominence. His idea for Earth Day came from the student teach-ins of the 1960s, but his cause inspired people across boundaries of age, race and location. This year, more than one billion people around the world will come together in the same way they did 40 years ago.

In a speech on that historic day in 1970, Gaylord noted that his goal was not just one of clean air and water, but also “an environment of decency, quality and mutual respect for all other human beings and all other living creatures.” He told the crowd that America could meet the challenge through our technology. The unanswered question was, he said, “Are we willing?”

That question was answered with a resounding yes. That year saw the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of the Clean Air Act. In 1972, six years after Gaylord Nelson stood alone on his proposed DDT ban, its use was ended. Later years would bring better protection of drinking water, emissions and efficiency standards for cars, programs to cleanup brownfields sites, and the protection and preservation of our forests, rivers, mountains and oceans.

Despite that progress – and I imagine Gaylord would be the first to note this – we still have much work ahead of us. We must use this anniversary to commit to another environmental decade. The needs of 40 years ago – cleaner water, cleaner air, more protection of our lands – are still here, but the next challenge we must face is climate change.

From lower lake levels, to more invasive species, the consequences of unchecked climate change could be devastating to the people of Wisconsin. Climate change isn’t just a threat, it is also an opportunity. Structured correctly, the solutions to slowing climate change can also speed up our economic recovery.

Remarkable research and development is happening today in Wisconsin – on products for cleaner water, advanced battery technology, and using waste from farms and forests to make advanced biofuels. We have companies developing products to harness the power of the sun to replace traditional interior lighting, retrofitting heavy-duty trucks into hybrids, and manufacturing energy-efficient hot water heaters.

In Congress, legislative work to address climate change is ongoing. With the right mixture of requirements and incentives, we can achieve a policy that reduces our dependence on foreign oil, cuts greenhouse gas emissions, lowers prices at the pump and on the electricity bill, and creates good-paying jobs that cannot be outsourced.

We do not have to choose between the environment and the economy; between jobs and solving climate change. Gaylord Nelson made this point over and over again. He once wrote that “all economic activity depends upon the…air, water, soil, forest, minerals, wetlands, rivers, lakes, oceans, wildlife habitats, and scenic beauty.” These, he said, “are the accumulated capital resources of the nation. Take them away and what you have left is a wasteland.”

On this 40th anniversary of Earth Day, while we remember the pioneering sprit of Gaylord Nelson, we must honor his legacy by turning words into action.


Sincerely,


Herb Kohl

Good grief, Herb.

While Nelson did many worthy deeds, working to ban DDT was certainly not one of them.

I have no problem with Earth Day.

We should take care of the environment, but we're also morally obligated to take care of each other.

Properly using DDT would help us to ease so much suffering and spare so much pain and save so many, many precious lives.

Milwaukee's Great Lakes 2008 Earth Day Challenge: Scrap This!

On Saturday, April 26, Milwaukee "is hosting a one-day special collection event where residents will have the opportunity to recycle old TVs in addition to computer electronics."



That's nice.

The City of Milwaukee and Keep Greater Milwaukee Beautiful present Milwaukee's Great Lakes 2008 Earth Day Challenge E-Scrap Collection to be held at the Italian Community Center's south parking lot on Saturday April 26, 2008 from 10am to 2pm.

This event is free and open to City of Milwaukee residents, who must present an ID or copy of a bill with a Milwaukee address. This event is for residents only -- no businesses please.

Wow. You need to present an ID to drop off old TVs and computer equipment.

In Milwaukee, you don't need to present an ID to vote!

That's weird, but this is nuts:



PLEASE LIMIT TO 4 UNITS PER VEHICLE.

What's the point of this event? Is it to recycle safely? That's how it's being promoted.

I don't get why they'd limit it to 4 units per vehicle.

Wouldn't it be more successful if they collected as much electronic scrap as possible?

Should a family take two cars to the event if they have more than 4 units to scrap? Are they encouraging people to make two trips to stay within the 4 unit limit?

That's not very environmentally-friendly.

Help keep these items out of landfills and protect Lake Michigan! They can contain lead, mercury, and other heavy metals that harm human health and the environment if released into the air or water.

If the event sponsors truly want to achieve that end, then why would they place a limit?

If you have more than 4 units you don't want, then you have more than 4 that need to be safely recycled.

If there is concern that they won't be able to handle all the units and they'll be overwhelmed, then this event appears to be more of a symbolic thing rather than a serious attempt to dispose of electronic units in a manner that won't harm the environment.

The message seems to be:

We want to have a collection, but we don't want to collect too much.

We want you to recycle and protect the planet, but don't overdo it.

The Food Crisis

There's a global warming/climate change crisis.

I know that because NBC's peacock logo is green this week and Jay Leno is having "green" guests on his program to raise awareness. He's also wearing green ties.

But there's a more immediate crisis at hand, and it's one that is inexcusable.

The world faces a "silent tsunami" of soaring food prices.

The world faces a "silent tsunami" of soaring food prices and more must be done to help secure future supply, the UN food agency said Tuesday as experts gathered in London for a special summit on the problem.

The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) said an extra 100 million people who previously did not require help could now not afford to buy food.

It said the soaring prices threatened anti-poverty and health improvement initiatives in the world's poorest nations and left a 755-million-dollar hole in the organisation's 2.9-billion-dollar budget.

"This is the new face of hunger -- the millions of people who were not in the urgent hunger category six months ago but now are," said WFP executive director Josette Sheeran in a statement.

"The response calls for large-scale, high-level action by the global community, focused on emergency and longer-term solutions."

Food prices have risen rapidly since the last quarter of 2007, blamed in varying degrees on rising populations, the use of biofuels to combat climate change, higher demand from developing countries, natural disasters and higher fuel prices.

Price hikes for staples such as rice -- which is now nearing the 1,000 dollars per tonne mark, more than double the cost in early March -- have led to riots and protests in a number of developing countries.

The food crisis isn't just hitting developing countries.

The two biggest U.S. warehouse retail chains are limiting how much rice customers can buy because of what Sam's Club, a division of Wal-Mart Stores Inc., called on Wednesday "recent supply and demand trends."

The broader chain of Wal-Mart stores has no plans to limit food purchases, however.

The move comes as U.S. rice futures hit a record high amid global food inflation, although one rice expert said the warehouse chains may be reacting less to any shortages than to stockpiling by restaurants and small stores.

Sam's Club followed Seattle-based Costco Wholesale Corp., which put limits in at least some stores on bulk rice purchases.

Here's more on the "hoarding epidemic" in the U.S.

Load up the pantry!

For 34 years, Patel Brothers has catered to the city’s South Asian households. Starting yesterday, though, the supermarket decided to restrict bulk purchases of some varieties of rice, limiting customers to two 20-pound bags.

Though shortages of the staple have led to hoarding in recent weeks around the globe, soaring prices have now sparked fears of a coming shortage in the U.S., leading to stockpiling by restaurants and small stores.

The Gates Foundation is responding to the food crisis.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will increase spending on farming projects by 50 percent this year as surging food prices threaten starvation and social unrest in poor countries.

The world's largest charitable foundation will give grants for agricultural programs totaling about $240 million this year, up from $160 million last year, said Rajiv Shah, the foundation's director of agricultural development and a former adviser to 2000 Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore.

``We are ramping up activity,'' Shah said in a telephone interview yesterday from Seattle, where the foundation is based. ``The focus will be on encouraging extra supply, which is one reason global food prices have climbed so high.''

New funding from Gates for agriculture in poverty-stricken countries comes as food prices soar around the world. The Gates programs aim to increase farm productivity, a task that has received less attention from larger aid institutions.

The proportion of global development aid devoted to agriculture is 4 percent, according to figures from the World Bank. The share of World Bank financing devoted to farming dropped to 12 percent in 2007, from 30 percent in 1980.

``The strength of the foundation is that because it is not constrained by politics, it can afford to take a longer view on food supply,'' said Ruth Levine, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, an aid research group in Washington. ``They are working on research and activities that have been very under-funded'' by other groups, she said.

What's sick is that at least some of this "silent tsunami" of hunger is of our making.

The increasing use of crops to produce biofuels has been criticized as contributing to food shortages. While Britain and the European Union have called for greater use of biofuels, Brown said Tuesday that "we need to look closely at the impact on food prices and the environment."

"If our U.K. review shows that we need to change our approach, we will also push for change in E.U. biofuels targets," he said.

So people are starving, but rest easy. You're using ethanol, and that's good. Right?

I wonder what Al Gore has to say about the food crisis. He certainly has played a role in it.

Read Vice President Al Gore's remarks from the Third Annual Farm Journal Conference, Tuesday, December 1, 1998:

My earliest lessons about the environment were about the prevention of soil erosion on our family farm. And what I learned then I believe now: we should not have an either-or, us-versus-them mentality when it comes to agriculture and the environment. We need both. And we need sustainable natural resource policies, incentive-based conservation efforts, and cutting-edge research to make sustainability a real possibility on the farm.

Over the past six years, we have launched and strengthened several programs that promote good farming while protecting the environment. For instance, through the Conservation Reserve Program and the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, we are forming partnerships with states and with growers to protect water quality, by setting aside land along rivers and streams. As of last month, more than 30 million acres were being protected. And last year, more than 8 million acres were protected under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, although I was disappointed that Congress denied a $100 million increase requested by the President, and actually cut this innovative program by $25 million.

I was also proud to stand up for the ethanol tax exemption when it was under attack in the Congress -- at one point, supplying a tie-breaking vote in the Senate to save it. The more we can make this home-grown fuel a successful, widely-used product, the better-off our farmers and our environment will be.

Similarly, we need to address the challenge of global warming in ways that are market-based, and good for farmers. Certainly, no line of work is more vulnerable to changes in the weather than agriculture. And perhaps no part of our economy has more to gain from serious efforts to reduce global warming. Fortunately, part of the solution can be found right on the farm. We can reduce greenhouse gases through carbon sequestration -- the use of agriculture to suck the carbon out of the air and deposit it into the soil, enriching our farmland and making our air cleaner at the same time. That is why, last month in Buenos Aires, our negotiators won agreement with other nations on a comprehensive approach that we hope will lead to an international consensus on the role agricultural conservation can play in meeting this challenge. In fact, the Chicago Board of Trade is already exploring ways that farmers can profit from emissions trading, by selling carbon credits on the open market.

Yes, Gore bragged about his tie-breaking vote in the Senate when the the ethanol tax exemption was under attack.

"The more we can make this home-grown fuel a successful, widely-used product, the better-off our farmers and our environment will be."

I guess Gore didn't think about the consequences of pushing biofuels without taking into account its impact on the food supply.

STARVATION.

Another Inconvenience for Al Gore

From NewsBusters:

It goes without saying that climate realists around the world believe Nobel Laureate Al Gore used false information throughout his schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" in order to generate global warming hysteria.

On Friday, it was revealed by ABC News that one of the famous shots of supposed Antarctic ice shelves in the film was actually a computer-generated image from the 2004 science fiction blockbuster "The Day After Tomorrow."

What genius thought it would be a good idea to swipe a computer-generated image from a fictional movie and pass it off as truth in a "documentary"?

That's unbelievably stupid.

Oh, Gore...

Green Blogging on Earth Day 2008

Today is Earth Day, and the Left is using it as an opportunity to do what it loves to do -- bash Bush.

The Boston Globe slams Bush's environmental record in an editorial today.

Amid the expected criticism of the Bush administration, enemy of the environment, there is also some rather harsh criticism of the observance of Earth Day itself aimed at the Green hypocrites.

In the Wall Street Journal, Jeffrey Ball addresses the fear of some activists "that something gets lost in the pop-environmentalism this once-a-year celebration has come to epitomize: bold action. They fret that a flood of well-meaning but inadequate gestures gives people a false sense of progress, lulling them into complacency just when the world needs more environmental action and less talk -- not the other way around."

He goes on:

"The danger is we let ourselves be happy with gestures rather than substance," said Hal Harvey, environment-program director for the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, which helps bankroll prominent environmental groups. Mr. Harvey sat next to a woman on a flight who took what she thought was a principled environmental stand: She refused creamer for her coffee because of its tiny plastic-cup packaging -- amid the din of jet engines burning thousands of gallons of fuel.

Green-minded consumers could be forgiven for thinking all is well. Madison Avenue is working overtime to convince the public that its clients are doing their bit for the environment. Bob Knott, who heads the environmental business-strategy practice at the Edelman public-relations firm, advises clients wanting to make a green splash today: "Come out with something big. Otherwise you'll get lost in the shuffle."

In a news release Friday, LexisNexis boasted that it is "contributing to the 'green' movement" through a service that lets law firms and courts exchange legal documents online, saving paper. The release said the service has saved "roughly 125,000 trees," curbing greenhouse-gas emissions "by 30,000 tons."

But the company didn't explain that that isn't much. The savings occurred over multiple years; they amount to about 0.004% of the carbon-dioxide emissions the U.S. pulp and paper industry produces annually. LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc., concedes that the service's environmental benefit is small.

In the Washington Post, Hank Stuever went so far as to memorialize the dead Earth Day and ponder its demise, citing "celebrity piety and corporate baloney" as the cause of its death.

Don't lose hope. An editorial in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel prefers to praise Earth Day rather than bury it.

There is no question that much progress has been made on the environment since the first Earth Day in 1970. Much of that progress is due to the sensibilities created by the environmental movement and leaders such as Wisconsin's own Gaylord Nelson, the founder of Earth Day. Much work remains to be done, but the environment is significantly healthier than it was 38 years ago.

However, the challenge the planet faces now - climate change - is perhaps bigger than the challenges of 1970. The good news this Earth Day is that the alarm has been sounded, and people are responding across a spectrum of local, national and international venues to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.

Wait a minute.

The JS Editorial Board says that the "environment is significantly healthier than it was 38 years ago," since the first Earth Day. That's great, but there's bad news.

The problem is today's environmental challenge is perhaps bigger than the challenges of 1970, with its visibly foul air and contaminated bodies of water. Today's problem, of course, is climate change, previously called "global warming," or still called "global warming," or environmental Armageddon, or something that elicits panic.

Is the Board saying that the climate wasn't changing 38 years ago, when there was dramatically less environmental awareness and dramatically more pollution? Hmm.

So, climate change is something new for the planet according to the Board.

Really? What was the Ice Age about?

I was under the impression that the environment is always in process. I think we had climate change or global warming or global cooling 38 years ago, too. I think it was around even before then. That's not important. Reality shouldn't get in the way of the festivities of this special day.

Anyway, in honor of Earth Day, this post is going green in a gesture of... greenness.

There.

I've done my part, like NBC making its little peacock logo green this week.

This is really gratifying, being green. This must be what the gluttonous Al Gore feels like when he guzzles jet fuel, flying around the world to warn of global warming, and carbon emissions, and those poor drowning polar bears.

It's good to be green for a day.

Note to TIME

The decision to use the image of Marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima and transform it to depict environmentalists' green movement is TIME at its lowest.

NewsBusters has a transcript of TIME editor Rick Stengel discussing the cover and cover story on MSNBC's Morning Joe.

RICK STENGEL: The cover story, I mean there's been so many stories about the environment and we see them all the time. And they're often just descriptive. And what we decided is we wanted to do something something that was prescriptive. We we wanted to say, you know what? We know there's a problem, we acknowledge there's a problem, global warming exists. Here is a strategy for how to handle it. And by using that famous Iwo Jima image and saying basically what we have to do is what we did before World War II by creating a great national effort, national endeavor, to combat this problem. Using cap-and-trade policy and using new research into renewable energy and having an efficiency surge with energy all across the country. This is this massive effort that is needed.

That is so lame.

It makes no sense to use "that famous Iwo Jima image and saying basically what we have to do is what we did before World War II."

Put the global warming and the bad science and the "sky is falling" propaganda aside for a moment.

Why use an image from World War II to depict what Stengel calls a "great national effort" to fight global warming?

The Marines didn't raise the flag on Iwo Jima BEFORE World War II. That image has absolutely nothing to do with BEFORE the U.S. war effort to save the world.

It's so terribly disrespectful to the thousands who died in the Battle of Iwo Jima. In about 35 days, over six thousand Americans were killed fighting for that island.

Comparing the deadliest war in human history to global warming is an absolute disgrace.

In addition to the disgusting cover image, TIME lends such importance to its global warming issue, that it has altered its trademark red border for only the second time, trimming the cover in green. The other instance TIME didn't have a red border was for its 9/11 edition. That cover was edged in black.

TIME is in desperate need of some perspective.


Question: Will Obama wear a tree pin in his lapel?

The Left would love that!

Eco-Friendly Funerals

The Wisconsin State Journal has a story on green funerals.

When people ask Dave Drapac about his plans for a cemetery where people can be buried without chemicals or even a coffin, their responses tend more toward "cool" than "yuck."

People have said "I love the idea that I can be composted," said Drapac, president of the Trust for Natural Legacies, which works to preserve and restore natural areas throughout the Midwest. The group is one of two here looking to establish a "green" graveyard.

"You can pretend that your body's going to be nice and preserved if embalmed and air tight," he said. But that's not the case. "It's not a pretty picture any way you choose."

It's an idea that's catching on. Circle Cemetery, an arm of Circle Sanctuary near Barneveld, is seeking to expand its existing one-acre cremains-only cemetery to 20 acres to include natural burials.

Next month, Forest Home Cemetery in Milwaukee will set aside three of its 200 acres for green burial sites -- possibly the first cemetery in the state to do so. About eight green cemeteries, including some where only a portion are green, have been established in the nation in the last 10 years, Drapac said.

...Locating a loved one's grave in a green cemetery may take a bit more work, however. Because there won't be any headstones, visitors to the green portion of Milwaukee's Forest Home Cemetery will be given GPS devices to find the sites, Kursel said.

Large boulders will be placed on the property on which peoples' names and dates will be inscribed, he said.

Drapac also envisions a more natural marker for any future conservation cemetery his group establishes.

"A lot of people like the idea of a living marker like a tree (or) perennial flower," he said.

Traditional funeral services, including a viewing, can still be incorporated into green burials even though the body wouldn't be embalmed.

If the body needs to be viewed a week after the death, it can be preserved through refrigeration or dry ice, Drapac said.

I don't like the idea of no headstones.

GPS devices? Give me a break.

A grave is meant to be marked. Trees and flowers are nice, but as more would be planted in a cemetery, it would be confusing. It would be difficult to distinguish the right oak tree, for example. Would there be name tags? Also, trees and flowers don't last. They can be damaged by storms. They can become sick. They die, too. A grave site is sacred ground and serves as a permanent memorial.

I don't know about the dry ice preservation idea, either.

Do traditional funeral and burial methods really pose a serious threat to the environment?

I'm fine with people choosing so-called "eco-friendly" funerals. One's final wishes are one's final wishes.

Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on a GPS device to find a loved one's grave.

Dump On

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A few hours without rain Friday afternoon reduced flows from municipal sewers to Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District facilities to the extent that district officials were optimistic they could halt blending of partly and fully treated wastewater at the Jones Island sewage plant by this morning.

But no end was in sight Friday for the combined sewer overflows to Milwaukee rivers and Lake Michigan that began Thursday evening.

Blending started around 8:15 p.m. Thursday as a last resort to push more wastewater through Jones Island and prevent filling the deep tunnel storage system to capacity, district Executive Director Kevin Shafer said. At about 9 p.m. Friday, the deep tunnel, with a capacity of 405 million gallons, remained 87% full. A separate northwest side storage tunnel, with a capacity of 89 million gallons, was 85% full.

...Combined sewers will not resume discharging to the deep tunnel, a step that would end the overflows, until rain is out of the immediate forecast and flows from municipal sanitary sewers no longer pour into the tunnel, Jankowski said.

Neither seemed likely to occur before midday Saturday....

On Friday afternoon, municipal sanitary sewers continued to discharge to the tunnel at a rate of around 44 million gallons a day. Progress was being made, however, as pumps were draining the tunnel faster than sanitary sewers were discharging to it.

The headline of the article: "Halt in rain helps to ease sewage mix"

The subhead: "Sewer overflows to lake, rivers will continue"

I think they should be flipped. The primary focus of the piece is on the dumping. That's the story.

Of course, a halt in the rain will help the situation.

"But no end was in sight Friday for the combined sewer overflows to Milwaukee rivers and Lake Michigan that began Thursday evening."

That's important.

Cut the crap. There's no way to put a positive spin on dumping partially treated wastewater into local rivers and the lake.

Idol Gives Back and Malaria

While watching Idol Gives Back tonight, I saw a heartbreaking segment on malaria.

Forest Whitaker and his wife were in Africa drawing attention to the disease and the millions of lives it claims.

One child dies of malaria every 30 seconds. The truly tragic thing is that the disease is preventable.

Mosquito nets at $10 a piece are touted as the solution. But there are more weapons available than nets to prevent the suffering.

Once again, I'm reminded of Rachel Carson and her legacy.
________________

From the 1998 PBS Frontline report, "Fooling with Mother Nature":

On the walls of the US vice president's office, you might expect to see framed photos of political giants past and present. Amidst his collection, however, Al Gore cherishes a picture of a biologist from Western Pennsylvania - Rachel Carson, author of "Silent Spring." Why does an unassuming scientist lay claim to this space? "For me personally," says Gore in his introduction to the 1992 edition of her book, "Silent Spring had a profound impact ... Indeed, Rachel Carson was one of the reasons that I became so conscious of the environment and so involved with environmental issues ... Carson has had as much or more effect on me than any, and perhaps than all of them together."

Yes, Gore wants to be the Rachel Carson of the new millenium, maybe more than he wanted to be President of the United States. He wants to follow in his hero's footsteps.

That's probably doubtful, but it can't be denied that Gore seems to be displaying far more passion for the environment than he was able to muster for the 2000 presidential campaign.

I think he wants that to be his legacy -- Al Gore, savior of the planet.

It bugs me that Rachel Carson continues to maintain hero status among environmentalists.

The fact is Carson relied on bad science to spur the modern environmental movement.

So many of Carson's claims have been refuted.

Read a sampling of the debunking of Silent Spring.

Why The Insecticide DDT Should Never Have Been Banned

Killing People - The banning of DDT and radical environmentalists

Malaria Foundation International

The Lies of Rachel Carson

Bring Back DDT, and Science With It!

The latter is a 2002 piece by Marjorie Mazel Hecht. It provides a concise overview of Carson's illegitimate assertions and the consequences of the hysteria that she launched.

The 1972 U.S. ban on DDT is responsible for a genocide 10 times larger than that for which we sent Nazis to the gallows at Nuremberg. It is also responsible for a menticide which has already condemned one entire generation to a dark age of anti-science ignorance, and is now infecting a new one.

The lies and hysteria spread to defend the DDT ban are typical of the irrationalist, anti-science wave which has virtually destroyed rational forms of discourse in our society. If you want to save science—and human lives—the fight to bring back DDT, now being championed by that very electable candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination, Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., had better be at the top of your agenda.

Sixty million people have died needlessly of malaria, since the imposition of the 1972 ban on DDT, and hundreds of millions more have suffered from this debilitating disease. The majority of those affected are children. Of the 300 to 500 million new cases of malaria each year, 200 to 300 million are children, and malaria now kills one child every 30 seconds. Ninety percent of the reported cases of malaria are in Africa, and 40 percent of the world’s population, inhabitants of tropical countries, are threatened by the increasing incidence of malaria.

...The campaign to ban DDT got its start with the publication of Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring in 1962. Carson’s popular book was a fraud. She played on people’s emotions, and to do so, she selected and falsified data from scientific studies... .

Does that sound a bit extreme?

Are you thinking that I'm citing sources that lack credibility?

Do you need a source that you can identify as enlightened, sophisticated, and acceptable to the liberal mindset?

OK.

Read "What the World Needs Now Is DDT."

It's by Tina Rosenberg and was published in The New York Times on April 11, 2004.

It appears that Rachel Carson, Al Gore's inspiration, sparked a movement that cost millions of lives.

The fact is Gore's hero had a role in millions of preventable deaths from malaria.

This reveals that the environmental movement is capable of producing catastrophes rather than preventing them.

I believe that we are stewards of God's creation and must care for the earth. I believe that we are called to protect the environment and not abuse the gift that it is. However, that goal cannot take precedence over caring for human life.

What was the cost of an environmental movement run amok?

Millions of precious lives.
______________

All three presidential contenders taped segments and were scheduled to appear on Idol Gives Back. Didn't happen last night.

Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain made taped appeals for charity on a special edition of “American Idol” on Wednesday night that didn’t make the cut. The telethon for needy children around the world entitled “Idol Gives Back” drew the likes of Fergie, Bono, Brad Pitt, Mariah Carey and Miley Cyrus, and went too long. The candidates’ contributions were kicked back to Thursday night’s episode.

Oh, spare us.

I think it would be better to leave Hillary and Obama and McCain off the show entirely.

Why should Idol offer them free campaign commercials on the broadcast?

Charlie Rose and Patriot-Challenged Ted Turner

Ted Turner was Charlie Rose's guest last night.

I didn't watch. I opted for the Magic Bullet infomercial instead.

I wasn't in the mood to hear Turner's drivel.

NewsBusters has some excerpts.

Like Michael Moore, Turner considers the American-killing Iraqi insurgents to be "patriots."

Turner told Rose:

I think that they're patriots and that they don't like us because we've invaded their country and occupied it. I think if the Iraqis were in Washington, D.C., we'd be doing the same thing: we'd be bombing them too. Nobody wants to be invaded.

Turner is clueless. He's no patriot. I guess it does take one to know one.

His prediction of what the world will be like if global warming isn't addressed is priceless.

TED TURNER: Not doing it will be catastrophic. We'll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state -- like Somalia or Sudan -- and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there'll be no more corn grown. Not doing it is suicide. Just like dropping bombs on each other, nuclear weapons is suicide. We've got to stop doing the suicidal two things, which are hanging on to our nuclear weapons and after that we've got to stabilize the population. When I was born-

CHARLIE ROSE: So what's wrong with the population?

TURNER: We're too many people. That's why we have global warming. We have global warming because too many people are using too much stuff. If there were less people, they'd be using less stuff.

Over billions of years, the earth has seen dramatic climate changes.

Turner predicts a dramatic change, a catastrophe in just over a generation.

I don't think so.

Turner goes beyond being an eccentric rich guy. He's nuts.

His comments about the insurgents being patriots anger me.

His comments about the age of cannibalism being on our doorstep are so over the top that it's funny.

(Thanks, Dave!)






"[President Bush] said it very clearly, he said 'Either you're with us, or you're against us.' And, I had a problem with that because I really hadn't made my mind up yet."

--TED TURNER

Barack Obama and Al Gore

Another reason to NOT vote for Barack Obama--

WALLINGFORD, Pa. -- Democrat Barack Obama says as president he would consider putting Al Gore in a Cabinet-level position — or higher.

A woman at a town hall asked the Illinois senator if elected president would he consider tapping the former vice president for his Cabinet, or an even higher level office, to address global warming.

"I would," Obama said. "Not only will I, but I will make a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve this problem. He's somebody I talk to on a regular basis. I'm already consulting with him in terms of these issues but climate change is real."

That's scary.

I don't want Al Gore at any table crippling the economy with silly, ineffective regulations. I don't want him telling me what to do. Government does not belong in my light sockets.

THEY WILL HAVE TO PRY MY INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS.

EARTH HOUR: LET THERE BE DARK

Will you be observing the Second Annual Earth Hour today at 8:00PM?

On March 29, 2008 at 8 p.m., join millions of people around the world in making a statement about climate change by turning off your lights for Earth Hour, an event created by the World Wildlife Fund.

Earth Hour was created by WWF in Sydney, Australia in 2007, and in one year has grown from an event in one city to a global movement. In 2008, millions of people, businesses, governments and civic organizations in nearly 200 cities around the globe will turn out for Earth Hour. More than 100 cities across North America will participate, including the US flagships–Atlanta, Chicago, Phoenix and San Francisco and Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver.

We invite everyone throughout North America and around the world to turn off the lights for an hour starting at 8 p.m. (your own local time)–whether at home or at work, with friends and family or solo, in a big city or a small town.

What will you do when the lights are off? We have lots of ideas.

Join people all around the world in showing that you care about our planet and want to play a part in helping to fight climate change. Don’t forget to sign up and let us know you want to join Earth Hour.

One hour, America. Earth Hour. Turn out for Earth Hour!

According to WWF:

Earth Hour is a global event created to symbolize that each one of us, working together, can make a positive impact on climate change - no matter who we are or where we live.

Created by WWF in Sydney, Australia in 2007, Earth Hour has grown from a single event into a global movement. In 2008, millions of people, businesses, governments and civic organizations in nearly 200 cities around the globe will turn out for Earth Hour. More than 35 US cities will participate, including the US flagships--Atlanta, Chicago, Phoenix and San Francisco.

When I hear "WWF," I still think of the World Wrestling Federation rather than the World Wildlife Fund.

Does that mean I'm not green enough?

Here's an AP report on how Earth Hour passed in Sydney:

Sydney's iconic Opera House and Harbour Bridge went dark Saturday night as the world's first major city turned off its lights for this year's Earth Hour, a global campaign to raise awareness of climate change.

A lightning show was the brightest part of Sydney's skyline during Earth Hour, which began at 8 p.m. when the lights were turned off at the city's landmarks. Most businesses and homes were already dark as Sydney residents embraced their second annual Earth Hour with candlelight dinners, beach bonfires and even a green-powered outdoor movie.

"This provides an extraordinary symbol and an indication that we can be part of the solution" to global warming, Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett told Sky News television, standing across the harbor from the dark silhouette of the Opera House.

Garrett said government offices and national monuments around the country participated in Earth Hour.

"We're not only talking the talk, we're walking the walk," he said as the hour ended. "Whatever your view is about the magnitude of the problem ... we can save money by using energy wisely and efficiently, and that gives us the added bonus of reduced greenhouse gas emissions."

During the one-hour event, Sydney was noticeably darker, though it was not a complete blackout. The business district was mostly dark; organizers said 250 of the 350 commercial buildings there had pledged to shut off their lights completely, and 94 of the top 100 companies on the Australian stock exchange were also participating.

The number of participants was not immediately available but organizers were hoping to beat last year's debut, when 2.2 million people and more than 2,000 businesses shut off lights and appliances, resulting in a 10.2 percent reduction in carbon emissions during that hour.

"I'm putting my neck on the line but my hope is that we top 100 million people," Earth Hour Australia chief executive Greg Bourne said.

The effect of last year's Earth Hour was infectious. This year 26 major world cities and more than 300 other cities and towns have signed up to participate.

Here's a list of the business supporters of Earth Hour in Wisconsin:

Healing Muscle Therapies - Racine, WI

Inner Sun Yoga Studo - Oshkosh, WI

Interfaith Community for the Earth - Stevens Point, WI

Jungian Analyst - Milwaukee, WI

Kenosha Moms Network - Kenosha, WI

Leadership Academy Martial Arts - Woodruff, WI

Well, it's not as dramatic as the Syndey Opera House going dark, but it's a start, I guess.

Check out Google:

Google Users in the United States will notice today that we "turned the lights out" on the Google.com homepage as a gesture to raise awareness of a worldwide energy conservation effort called Earth Hour. As to why we don't do this permanently - it saves no energy; modern displays use the same amount of power regardless of what they display. However, you can do something to reduce the energy consumption of your home PC by joining the Climate Savers Computing Initiative.

On Saturday, March 29, 2008, Earth Hour invites people around the world to turn off their lights for one hour – from 8:00pm to 9:00pm in their local time zone. On this day, cities around the world, including Copenhagen, Chicago, Melbourne, Dubai, and Tel Aviv, will hold events to acknowledge their commitment to energy conservation.

Given our company's commitment to environmental awareness and energy efficiency, we strongly support the Earth Hour campaign, and have darkened our homepage today to help spread awareness of what we hope will be a highly successful global event.

That's sort of funny.

"As to why we don't do this permanently - it saves no energy; modern displays use the same amount of power regardless of what they display."

Of course, these sort of events are meant to raise awareness and not really have an impact in themselves.

Remember Al Gore's Live Earth concerts, July 7, 2007?

Live Earth is promoting green to save the planet - what planet are they on?

The Live Earth event is, in the words of one commentator: "a massive, hypocritical fraud".

For while the organisers' commitment to save the planet is genuine, the very process of putting on such a vast event, with more than 150 performers jetting around the world to appear in concerts from Tokyo to Hamburg, is surely an exercise in hypocrisy on a grand scale.

Matt Bellamy, front man of the rock band Muse, has dubbed it 'private jets for climate change'.

A Daily Mail investigation has revealed that far from saving the planet, the extravaganza will generate a huge fuel bill, acres of garbage, thousands of tonnes of carbon emissions, and a mileage total equal to the movement of an army.

The most conservative assessment of the flights being taken by its superstars is that they are flying an extraordinary 222,623.63 miles between them to get to the various concerts - nearly nine times the circumference of the world. The true environmental cost, as they transport their technicians, dancers and support staff, is likely to be far higher.

The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists' and spectators' travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specialises in such calculations.

Throw in the television audience and it comes to a staggering 74,500 tonnes. In comparison, the average Briton produces ten tonnes in a year.

The concert will also generate some 1,025 tonnes of waste at the concert stadiums - much of which will go directly into landfill sites.

A massive global event to raise awareness about the impact that human beings have on the climate while actually adding to the alleged problem was such a joke!

Organizers claimed that the concerts would be as "green" as possible. Yeah, right. The concerts weren't going to be "green." Impossible.

But, it served to alleviate guilt I suppose, like the carbon offsets scam.

Doing something symbolic for an hour can make one feel good. Really making lifestyle changes requires so much effort.

So, between 8:00 and 9:00PM tonight, participate in Earth Hour, as a symbolic gesture. Then turn around and be an energy glutton after you're feeling good about yourself.

In my opinion, if you really are committed to the cause, you need to do much more than spend one hour in the dark.

If you really want to do your part, you could move in to a dramatically smaller home to reduce your energy consumption, drive a tiny car or ditch the car altogether, and conserve on toilet paper, as Sheryl Crow suggests. Go paperless, starting by cancelling your subscription to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel or any other newspaper you might still get. Cancel your magazine subscriptions if you have any.

And most importantly, reduce your carbon emissions dramatically by never exhaling ever again.

I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE

I am so sick of this winter.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Winter-weary Wisconsinites could rightly grouse about La Niña, or complain about devilish upper-level air patterns, as they prepare for yet another snowstorm, one predicted to pile another 10 inches on already snowbound areas.

Experts say that both meteorological phenomena are likely culprits behind the snow, blow, and repeat pattern that has been locked in place for the better part of nine weeks and will assert itself again this afternoon through Wednesday.

...In anticipation, the National Weather Service has issued a winter storm warning in effect from 6 p.m. today until 3 p.m. Wednesday.

Up to 10 inches of snow is forecast to fall over that time in the southeast corner of the state, with 20-mph winds creating plenty of blowing and drifting. Lesser amounts of snow are expected a bit north and west, in Dodge, Dane and Jefferson counties, and in north central Wisconsin.

"We're kind of in the bull's-eye for heavy snow," said Chris Franks, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Sullivan. "The upper level winds have been steering everything right on top of us."

If the coming storm delivers as predicted, it would push total snowfall for February in Milwaukee beyond the normal 11.3 inches and make for three straight months of snow above the norm.

Jim Angel, a climatologist working along with the Midwest Regional Climate Center in Illinois, figures La Niña has been a factor.

Studies have shown that colder-than-normal Pacific water temperatures near the equator tend to result in more precipitation in the Great Lakes region and more active weather patterns. The effects this season have been widespread.

How can Pacific water temperatures be colder than normal?

I'm still using incandescent light bulbs.

I haven't followed Sheryl Crow's advice to skimp on my toilet paper use.

I haven't bought any carbon offsets.

The ocean temps should be warmer, not colder. It doesn't make sense. What about global warming and all those dire "sky is falling" hysterical predictions from Al Gore and his followers?

Could it be that a colder than normal Pacific ocean is caused by global warming? That must be it.

I don't get it, but I know La Niña is the enemy.

We need to warm up the Pacific and stop La Niña now. Can't something be done about the upper-level air patterns?

This winter has to end. I was against it from the beginning. I never supported all this snow.

Maybe Russ Feingold can set up a timetable for snow removal.

January Tornadoes

This has been a weird winter. It's unusual for the temperature to be around 50 at 1:00 AM in January in Wisconsin. Al Gore must be salivating.

Within the span of a few weeks, we've had a winter's worth of snow and ice and cold, along with the accompanying damn ice dams; and we moved straight into the big thaw, dense fog, temperatures in the 60s, and wicked springtime-like thunderstorms with tornadoes.

For some people yesterday, the storms were more than an inconvenience. Some lost more than their power. They lost their homes. Two people lost their lives.

MARSHFIELD, Mo. -- A rare January outbreak of tornadoes raked the Midwest on Monday, flattening houses in several states and killing at least two people in Missouri.

An elderly woman was killed near Strafford in Greene County, officials said, and a 53-year-old woman's body was found by rescuers in a wooded area north of Marshfield near her trailer, which was destroyed.

At least six people were taken to hospitals by ambulance, said Michael Taylor, fire chief in Marshfield in the southwestern part of the state.

Two other people were in critical condition, said Ed Gray, a spokesman for Missouri's emergency management agency.

Storms continued to pummel the nation's midsection as darkness fell on a day when record temperatures were reported across much of the country. Tornadoes were also reported or suspected in Arkansas and Oklahoma and along the Illinois-Wisconsin line.

...About six homes were destroyed in the small town of Poplar Grove, Ill., where authorities rescued motorists trapped by downed, live electrical lines and crews searched damaged structures to make sure no one was trapped. Three people suffered minor injuries, Boone County Sheriff's Lt. Perry Gay said.

About 15 miles away in Harvard, Ill., a suspected tornado derailed one locomotive and 12 freight cars. A tank car containing shock fluid leaked for hours before it was contained, and another derailed car contained ethylene oxide, a flammable material widely used to sterilize medical supplies, but was not leaking, Union Pacific spokesman Mark Davis said.

Authorities ordered about 500 residents to evacuate the nearby unincorporated town of Lawrence, said Capt. David Shepherd with the McHenry County Sheriff's Office. No injuries were reported, he said.

As costly as the property damage is, it's the human toll that is the most devastating in these natural disasters.

Areas of southeastern Wisconsin were hit hard in terms of property destruction.

TOWN OF WHEATLAND, Wis. (AP) -- The Kenosha County sheriff says it's a miracle no one was seriously injured when a rare series of January tornadoes ripped through southeastern Wisconsin and left demolished houses in its wake.

"I have never seen damage like this in the summertime when we have potential for tornadoes," Sheriff David Beth said. "To see something like this in January is mind-boggling to me. This is just unimaginable to me."

The storm system that spawned the twisters swung north from northern Illinois about 4:15 p.m. Monday, according to the National Weather Service.

Hardest hit was a subdivision in the town of Wheatland, about 50 miles southwest of Milwaukee and just north of the Illinois border.

Deputies were already in the area, responding to a rollover accident, when they saw a house collapse, Beth said. Windblown debris ripped the emergency light bar off their squad car.

The deputies got the motorist out of the car and then ran to the house.

"They pulled the wreckage from the basement door and got some people out," he said.

There were two or three houses where people had to be rescued, but they only suffered bumps and bruises, Beth said.

Matthew Gronke, fire chief for the town of Randall, said 11 houses in Wheatland were destroyed, five others had heavy damage and four had moderate damage.

In addition to the tornado in Wheatland, another was confirmed south of Wheatland and a third on the north side of Kenosha, said Wisconsin Emergency Management spokeswoman Lori Getter.

It truly is a miracle that no one was seriouly injured in the storms that ripped through Walworth, Kenosha, and Racine counties.

...The tornado warning disrupted legal proceedings in Walworth County, as at least 300 people were evacuated to a courthouse basement as a precaution.

Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce E. Schroeder was presiding over opening testimony in a high-profile murder trial that was moved in Walworth County. He said he couldn't believe it when the deputy said the courtroom had to be evacuated because of a tornado warning.

"It's a first," he said while waiting in the basement. "I've actually had .... warnings occur during jury trials before and frankly I just ignored them. But not in January."

The evacuation lasted about an hour.

How surreal!

According to data from the National Weather Service, Wisconsin previously had recorded only one tornado in January since 1844. The only other tornado in the first month of the year was in 1967.

The twisters were part of an odd series of weather phenomena. The temperature in Milwaukee soared to a record for the date of 63 degrees, far above the previous high of 47 in 1965 and again in 2003.

There's no question that the weather was abnormal, but I don't think believers in Al Gore's brand of global warming hysteria should use the events as proof that the planet is on the brink.

There was a January tornado in Wisconsin over 40 years ago. Obviously, it's rare, but yesterday's outbreak wasn't the first.

Instead of freaking out about global warming Armageddon and politicizing the unusual weather, concern should be for the victims of the storms.

The fact is weird things happen. Yesterday was an exceptionally weird day.

An Inconvenient Baby

What would Al Gore say about this?

Some people believe with a religious zeal that babies are bad for the environment.

Had Toni Vernelli gone ahead with her pregnancy ten years ago, she would know at first hand what it is like to cradle her own baby, to have a pair of innocent eyes gazing up at her with unconditional love, to feel a little hand slipping into hers - and a voice calling her Mummy.

But the very thought makes her shudder with horror.

Because when Toni terminated her pregnancy, she did so in the firm belief she was helping to save the planet.

..."Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," says Toni, 35.

"Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population."

While most parents view their children as the ultimate miracle of nature, Toni seems to see them as a sinister threat to the future.

This woman is nuts.

She should have been in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. (She wasn't, right? I haven't seen it.)

...[W]hile other young women dream of marriage and babies, Toni was convinced it was her duty not to have a child.

She claims she was far from alone.

"Through my job I made many friends who, like me, were more interested in campaigning, trying to change society and save the planet rather than having families of our own.

"We used to say that if ever we did want children, we'd adopt, as there are so many children in need of a loving family.

"At least then, we'd be doing something positive for the world, rather than something negative."

Toni was happy, at last, with fellow environmentalists who shared her philosophy. But when she was 25, disaster struck.

"I discovered that despite taking the Pill, I'd accidentally fallen pregnant by my boyfriend.

"I was horrified. I knew straight away there was no option of having the baby."

"I went to my doctor about having a termination, and asked if I could be sterilised at the same time.

"This time it was a male doctor. I remember saying to him: 'I want to make sure this never happens again.'

"He said: 'You may not want a child, but one day you may meet a man who does'. He refused to consider it.

"I didn't like having a termination, but it would have been immoral to give birth to a child that I felt strongly would only be a burden to the world.

"I've never felt a twinge of guilt about what I did, and have honestly never wondered what might have been.

This is weird. Vernelli desperately wanted to be sterilized, yet she was probably sloppy about taking the Pill. If the thought of a pregnancy was so horrifying to her, you'd think that she would have been more careful.

I don't get how somehow who supposedly reveres the planet and the wonders of nature would destroy a living thing, with absolutely no pangs of guilt.

She claims she never wondered about the child she aborted.

That sounds pretty selfish to me.

I doubt that she'd kill a polar bear. If she did, she'd probably be haunted by what might have been.

Here is where Vernelli really comes off as a selfish wacko rather than a selfless crusader to save the world:

"I've never doubted that I made the right decision. Ed and I married in September 2002, and have a much nicer lifestyle as a result of not having children.

"We love walking and hiking, and we often go away for weekends.

"Every year, we also take a nice holiday - we've just come back from South Africa.

"We feel we can have one long-haul flight a year, as we are vegan and childless, thereby greatly reducing our carbon footprint and combating over-population.

What a hypocrite!

This devoted environmentalist boards a carbon emission-spewing plane and goes on "a nice holiday." I don't care if she's a vegan and childless. This carbon offset stuff is a load of crap. It's the scam of this young century.

If you care about the planet, then you care about it all the time. Everything you do counts. You don't fly to Africa and feel OK about it because you don't have a baby or don't eat cheeseburgers.

Vernelli goes on:

"My only frustration is that other people are unable to accept my decision.

"When I tell people why I don't want children, they look at me as if I was planning to commit murder.

What?

She aborted her child. She did commit murder. She was pregnant. She was carrying a genetically complete human being and she destroyed it.

I don't think a woman should feel pressured into having a family. Every woman doesn't have to be a mother.

BUT--

It's idiotic to suggest that having a child is a "sinister threat to the future."

Does Vernelli believe that the only way to "save" the planet is to ensure that human beings die out?

No more babies?

All this raises an interesting question:

If the planet is "saved" but there's no one around to see it, has it been "saved"?

NBC: It's Not Easy Being Green

Hypocrisy, thy name is NBC!



It's GREEN WEEK at NBC.

NBC Universal's new "Green is Universal" campaign kicks off Nov. 4th with a week of green-themed programming aimed at entertaining, informing and empowering Americans to lead greener lives.

It started last night, when NBC's Football Night in America went dark.

Did you watch that Cowboys - Eagles game? My guess is the audience shrunk faster than an iceberg. The stadium was deserted by the end.

Maybe the crowd wanted to get home and sit in the dark.

NBC has even bathed the "brought to you in living color" peacock logo in green.

Check it out. Isn't it inspiring?

That green peacock makes me want to turn off the TV.

All this green talk, the preaching and pontificating, is a joke.

The Today Show, in its "green" effort to raise awareness and crusade to save the planet, sent Ann Curry to Antarctica, Matt Lauer to Greenland, and Al Roker to the equator in South America. They're broadcasting live from "the ends of the Earth."

What was the environmental cost of sending their morning stars and crews all over the world to promote energy conservation?

It has to be massive.

Speaking of massive, Al Gore will be making a guest appearance on NBC's 30 Rock, in honor of GREEN WEEK. Do you think Al rode a bike to the studio?

Green messages will be woven throughout NBC's programming this week.

They have to be kidding.

NBC's holier-than-thou preaching belongs on the compost heap.

If NBC wanted to really do a service, the network would shut down for a week. That would save energy. It would show that people need to change their lifestyles and make sacrifices. It would be a sincere and dramatic statement.

Instead, I suspect that gluttonous GREEN WEEK is probably doing more damage to the planet than a typical week at NBC.

(Note: This post is green. Just doing my part to save the planet. That was easy! And it was as effective as NBC's GREEN WEEK. In fact, it's more effective, since I didn't travel to Antarctica to do it.)

Playing with Matches and Global Warming

Global warming proponents seized on the California wildfires to advance their agenda.

I didn't realize that global warming compelled people to start fires.

SANTA CLARITA, Calif. -- Officials blamed a wildfire that consumed more than 38,000 acres and destroyed 21 homes last week on a boy playing with matches, and said they would ask a prosecutor to consider the case.

The boy, whose name and age were not released, admitted to sparking the fire on Oct. 21, Los Angeles County sheriff's Sgt. Diane Hecht said Tuesday. Ferocious winds helped it quickly spread.

"He admitted to playing with matches and accidentally starting the fire," Hecht said in a statement.

The boy was released to his parents, and the case will be presented to the district attorney's office, Hecht said. It was not clear if he had been arrested or cited by detectives.

The fire began in an area near Agua Dulce and quickly spread. It was among 15 or so major wildfires that killed 14 people, destroyed some 2,100 homes and blackened 809 square miles from Los Angeles to the Mexican border last week.

Authorities arrested five people for arson during that period, but none have been linked to any of the major blazes.

The wildfires were supposed to be an indication of nature run amok because of years of abuse by gluttonous human beings and their irresponsible, environmentally unfriendly lifestyles.

Global warming alarmists don't want to hear about people starting the fires, whether intentionally or accidentally.

I don't think a boy playing with matches counts as an example of fires resulting because the planet has a fever.

Do excessive carbon emissions CAUSE kids to be careless with matches?

Do incandescent light bulbs have something to do with a kid sparking a fire?

Harry Reid Politicizes the Fires

As if Harry Reid hasn't done enough damage to his reputation recently, he's doing more with his comments on the California wildfires.

From The Hill:

Officials said Tuesday the winds and high temperatures are expected to continue. But when the fires do stop, lawmakers likely will debate the cause of the fire.

“One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday, stressing the need to pass the Democrats’ comprehensive energy package.

Moments later, when asked by a reporter if he really believed global warming caused the fires, he appeared to back away from his comments, saying there are many factors that contributed to the disaster.

I'm not surprised that Reid brought up global warming.

The fringe Lefty base probably demanded that the Dems play up global warming as a cause of the fires.

The disaster has to be Bush's fault. There are no acts of God.

As usual, the Dems look for ways to exploit others' misery for political gain.

Sick.