Study: Sexual problems reported by Chinese workers exposed to BPA

MSNBC | Nov 11, 2009

NEW YORK – Male factory workers in China who got very high doses of a chemical that’s been widely used in hard plastic bottles had high rates of sexual problems, researchers reported Wednesday.

The men in the study experienced BPA levels about 50 times higher than those faced by typical American men, said researcher Dr. De-Kun Li. “We don’t know” whether more typical doses have similar effects, he said.

People shouldn’t be alarmed by the finding, said Li, a reproductive and perinatal epidemiologist at Kaiser Permanente’s research division in Oakland, Calif. But he said it would be prudent to limit exposure to BPA while scientists look for any effects from lower doses.

The U.S. government recently announced new funding for research into BPA’s effects.

Li is lead author of the latest study, published online Wednesday by the journal Human Reproduction. The work was financed by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health.

BPA is used in a wide variety of consumer products, including some hard plastic bottles and metal food or beverage cans. Several makers of baby bottles recently said they had stopped using the chemical. Some 90 percent of the U.S. population carries detectable levels in the urine.

Scientists are concerned that BPA exposure might harm the reproductive and nervous systems, and possibly promote prostate and breast cancers. Last year, a preliminary study linked BPA to possible risks for heart disease and diabetes.

The Food and Drug Administration concluded last year that trace amounts of BPA that leach out of bottles and food containers are not dangerous. But the FDA is now reviewing that stance after criticism from its scientific advisers.

For the new research, Li and colleagues studied 164 factory workers in China who were exposed to high levels of BPA on the job. They were compared to 386 other men in the same town who either worked at other factories or were married to factory workers.

The scientists measured BPA exposure through air sampling, and interviewed the workers about their sexual functioning.

Compared to the other workers, men with high BPA exposure were about four times as likely to report trouble achieving erections, about seven times as likely to say they had difficulty ejaculating, and about four times as likely to report low sex drive or low satisfaction with their sex lives.

The effects are dramatic and “pretty clearly related to the exposure,” said Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who was not involved in the research.

The finding fits in with animal studies and should be followed up by research in the general population, she said. Her institute said last month it will spend more money on BPA-related research, bringing the total to $30 million over two years.

Steven Hentges, a BPA expert and official with the American Chemistry Council, an industry group, said the work is “probably not very relevant for consumers.”

For one thing, the reported 50-fold difference in exposure seems to be an underestimate because of how it was calculated, he said. In addition, he said, the workers inhaled BPA or got it on their skin. Consumers get it through diet instead, which lets the body detoxify it, Hentges said.

Li said the workers probably were exposed not only through inhalation and skin contamination but also by swallowing BPA powder that contaminated their food. He said he didn’t know which route was most prominent in the Chinese factories.

The criminal activities of the firm first came under scrutiny after a group of the firm’s members who were tasked to guard US diplomats in Iraq opened fire on civilians in Baghdad on September 2007, killing 17 people.

Salem-News.com | Nov 9, 2009

(BAGHDAD PressTV) – New disturbing charges have emerged against XE, the infamous private security firm formerly known as Blackwater Worldwide, whose operations came under spotlight after its 2007 carnage in Baghdad.

According to a report by MSNBC and based on alleged sworn declarations by two Blackwater employees in federal court, the firm used child prostitutes at its compound in Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone.

The declarations added Iraqi minors got involved in sexual acts with Blackwater members in exchange for one dollar. It is further alleged that Erik Prince, the firm’s owner, “failed to stop the ongoing use of prostitutes, including child prostitutes, by his men.”

Based on other statements, the firm was involved in another sex scandal; “Prince’s North Carolina operations had an ongoing wife-swapping and sex ring, which was participated in by many of Mr. Prince’s top executives.”

Iraq – Blackwater pimped out young Iraqi girls

The two employees also alleged that Prince “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe,” The Nation reported.

Prince also allegedly forced health professional to endorse the redeployment of those Blackwater members who had been mental problems, such as excessive drinking and drug abuse.

Other charges against the firm include arms smuggling, money laundering and tax evasion.

The criminal activities of the firm first came under scrutiny after a group of the firm’s members who were tasked to guard US diplomats in Iraq opened fire on civilians in Baghdad on September 2007, killing 17 people.

According to federal contract data obtained by The Nation, the Obama administration has recently extended a contract with Blackwater for more than $20 million for “security services” in Iraq.

An Iraqi woman looks at a blood-splattered car where two women were allegedly shot dead by private guards in Baghdad

AFP | Nov 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — Executives at US security firm Blackwater approved secret payments of about one million dollars to Iraqi officials to “silence their criticism” after company guards killed 17 civilians in Baghdad in 2007, the New York Times has said.

Citing interviews with four unnamed former Blackwater executives, the Times said the company’s president at the time, Gary Jackson, approved the bribes.

Money was sent from neighboring Jordan to their top company manager in Baghdad, but executives cited by the newspaper said they did not know if the funds were actually delivered.

One of the sources told the Times that officials at the Interior Ministry, where decisions over company operating licenses are made, were the intended recipients of the payments, which were aimed at quelling criticism and eliciting support.

The US State Department refused to renew annual contracts for Blackwater earlier this year after Iraq’s government banned it in January over the killings in Baghdad’s Nisur Square on September 16, 2007.

An Iraqi investigation found that 17 civilians died and 20 were wounded when Blackwater guards opened fire with automatic weapons while escorting an American diplomatic convoy through the square.

US prosecutors say 14 civilians were killed in the incident. Five former Blackwater guards pleaded not guilty at a federal court in Washington in January to manslaughter charges.

Blackwater chairman and founder Erik Prince did not dispute the existence of a bribery plan when he was confronted by Blackwater’s vice chairman at the time, Cofer Black, according to an executive familiar with their discussions on the matter, the Times said.

A spokeswoman for Blackwater, which renamed itself Xe after the Iraq government banned it, dismissed allegations of a bribery plot as “baseless.”

To replace Blackwater, the US State Department on March 31 awarded Virginia-based Triple Canopy a contract reportedly worth nearly a billion dollars to take over protection of US government personnel in Iraq.

The 2007 shooting focused a spotlight on the shadowy and highly lucrative operations of private security operations. Blackwater personnel were reported to earn as much as 1,000 dollars a day each in Iraq.

Foreign security teams in Iraq have long operated in a legal grey area, but under a military accord signed with Washington last November, Baghdad won a concession to lift the immunity to prosecution previously extended to US security contractors.

A report in the New York Times in April said that many of Triple Canopy company’s guards were likely to be former Blackwater employees.

Last month was the coldest October in 64 years, with all-time record low temperatures in many areas.

Northern News | Nov 11, 2009

The month had exceptionally late snowfalls and record low October temperatures were recorded on October 4 and 5 in most North Island locations, and on October 9 at many South Island sites.

Rainfall was well above normal rainfall in the east of the North Island, as well as in Wellington, Marlborough and parts of Canterbury. It was very dry on the West Coast of the South Island.

The month was extremely sunny on the West Coast of the South Island.

Record or near-record low October temperatures were experienced in many locations, with temperatures more than 2.0 degrees Celsius below average throughout eastern and alpine areas of the South Island, as well as in the lower half of the North Island.

Temperatures were below average – between 0.5 degrees and 1.2 degrees below average – elsewhere.

Overall for New Zealand, it was the coldest October in the 64 years since 1945, with a national average temperature of 10.6 degrees – 1.4 degrees below the long-term October average.

Such a cold October has occurred only four times in the past 100 years.

Well above normal October rainfall – above 150 percent of normal – was experienced across the east coast of the North Island, as well as Wellington, Marlborough and Canterbury, north of about Ashburton. Rainfall was near-record – and more than 200 percent of normal – in parts of Hawkes Bay, Gisborne and the Tararua district.

Unseasonable snowfalls characterised October 2009. An exceptionally heavy snow on October 4 and 5 in the Hawkes Bay and Central North Island was estimated to be the worst in October since 1967, stranding hundreds of travellers, closing roads, and resulting in heavy lambing losses.

Many locations in the North Island experienced record low October temperatures on October 5. Snowfall was also observed in Taranaki, Waikato and Rotorua on October 6. It was the first time it snowed in about 30 years around Rotorua.

utahskier.net | Nov 10, 2009

WASHINGTON, DC – The average October temperature of 50.8°F was 4.0°F below the 20thCentury average and ranked as the third coolest in the U.S. based on preliminary data, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

For the nation as a whole, it was the third coolest October on record, according to NOAA on their website. The month was marked by an active weather pattern that reinforced unseasonably cold air behind a series of cold fronts.

Temperatures were below normal in eight of the nation’s nine climate regions, and of the nine, five were much below normal. Only the Southeast climate region had near normal temperatures for October.

The Vatican Observatory, Castel Gandolfo

Church leaders call in experts to discuss implications of astrobiology

MSNBC | Nov 10, 2009

By Ariel David

VATICAN CITY – E.T. phone Rome. Four hundred years after it locked up Galileo for challenging the view that the Earth was the center of the universe, the Vatican has called in experts to study the possibility of extraterrestrial alien life and its implication for the Catholic Church.

“The questions of life’s origins and of whether life exists elsewhere in the universe are very suitable and deserve serious consideration,” said the Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, an astronomer and director of the Vatican Observatory.

Funes, a Jesuit priest, presented the results Tuesday of a five-day conference that gathered astronomers, physicists, biologists and other experts to discuss the budding field of astrobiology — the study of the origin of life and its existence elsewhere in the cosmos.

Funes said the possibility of alien life raises “many philosophical and theological implications” but added that the gathering was mainly focused on the scientific perspective and how different disciplines can be used to explore the issue.

‘A rich middle ground’
Chris Impey, an astronomy professor at the University of Arizona, said it was appropriate that the Vatican would host such a meeting.

“Both science and religion posit life as a special outcome of a vast and mostly inhospitable universe,” he told a news conference Tuesday. “There is a rich middle ground for dialogue between the practitioners of astrobiology and those who seek to understand the meaning of our existence in a biological universe.”

Thirty scientists, including non-Catholics, from the U.S., France, Britain, Switzerland, Italy and Chile attended the conference, called to explore among other issues “whether sentient life forms exist on other worlds.”

Funes set the stage for the conference a year ago when he discussed the possibility of alien life in an interview given prominence in the Vatican’s daily newspaper.

The Church of Rome’s views have shifted radically through the centuries since Italian philosopher Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake as a heretic in 1600 for speculating, among other ideas, that other worlds could be inhabited.

Scientists have discovered hundreds of planets outside our solar system — including 32 new ones announced recently by the European Space Agency. Impey said the discovery of alien life may be only a few years away.

“If biology is not unique to the Earth, or life elsewhere differs biochemically from our version, or we ever make contact with an intelligent species in the vastness of space, the implications for our self-image will be profound,” he said.

Similar discussions in 2005
This is not the first time the Vatican has explored the issue of extraterrestrials: In 2005, its observatory brought together top researchers in the field for similar discussions.

In the interview last year, Funes told Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano that believing the universe may host aliens, even intelligent ones, does not contradict a faith in God.

“How can we rule out that life may have developed elsewhere?” Funes said in that interview.

“Just as there is a multitude of creatures on Earth, there could be other beings, even intelligent ones, created by God. This does not contradict our faith, because we cannot put limits on God’s creative freedom.”

Funes maintained that if intelligent beings were discovered, they would also be considered “part of creation.”

The Roman Catholic Church’s relationship with science has come a long way since Galileo was tried as a heretic in 1633 and forced to recant his finding that the Earth revolves around the sun. Church teaching at the time placed Earth at the center of the universe.

Today top clergy, including Funes, openly endorse scientific ideas like the Big Bang theory as a reasonable explanation for the creation of the universe. The theory says the universe began billions of years ago in the explosion of a single, super-dense point that contained all matter.

Earlier this year, the Vatican also sponsored a conference on evolution to mark the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s “The Origin of Species.”

The event snubbed proponents of alternative theories, like creationism and intelligent design, which see a higher being rather than the undirected process of natural selection behind the evolution of species.

Still, there are divisions on the issues within the Catholic Church and within other religions, with some favoring creationism or intelligent design that could make it difficult to accept the concept of alien life.

Strengthening relationship
Working with scientists to explore fundamental questions that are of interest to religion is in line with the teachings of Pope Benedict XVI, who has made strengthening the relationship between faith and reason a key aspect of his papacy.

Recent popes have been working to overcome the accusation that the church was hostile to science — a reputation grounded in the Galileo affair.

In 1992, Pope John Paul II declared the ruling against the astronomer was an error resulting from “tragic mutual incomprehension.”

The Vatican Museums opened an exhibit last month marking the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s first celestial observations.

Tommaso Maccacaro, president of Italy’s national institute of astrophysics, said at the exhibit’s Oct. 13 opening that astronomy has had a major impact on the way we perceive ourselves.

“It was astronomical observations that let us understand that Earth (and man) don’t have a privileged position or role in the universe,” he said. “I ask myself what tools will we use in the next 400 years, and I ask what revolutions of understanding they’ll bring about, like resolving the mystery of our apparent cosmic solitude.”

The Vatican Observatory has also been at the forefront of efforts to bridge the gap between religion and science. Its scientist-clerics have generated top-notch research and its meteorite collection is considered one of the world’s best.

The observatory, founded by Pope Leo XIII in 1891, is based in Castel Gandolfo, a lakeside town in the hills outside Rome where the pope has his summer residence. It also conducts research at an observatory at the University of Arizona, in Tucson.

AFP | Nov 9, 2009

MILAN, Italy – Twenty years after the Berlin Wall fell, World Trade Organisation chief Pascal Lamy called Monday for world governance to be strengthened around the G20, international organisations and the UN.

“The fall of the Berlin Wall was indeed a turning point in globalisation, the end of the Cold War led to an unprecedented era of economic openness,” Lamy said in a speech at Bocconi University in Milan, northern Italy.

“And 20 years later the world is in a state of serious distress,” he added, citing the “worst economic crisis”, global warming and nuclear proliferation.

“Global challenges need global solutions and these can only come with the right global governance which today, 20 years later, remains too weak,” he said.

“The global economic crisis… has accelerated towards a sort of new architecture of global governance which I called a triangle of coherence,” he said.

This triangle is composed of the G20 group of wealthy and emerging economies as well as international agencies which report to what Lamy called the “parliament” of the United Nations.

Lamy said that “among the many regional integration attempts, the European Union remains the laboratory of international governance.”

Everyone in Britain could be given a personal ‘carbon allowance’

Everyone in Britain should have an annual carbon ration and be penalised if they use too much fuel, the head of the Environment Agency will say.

Telegraph | Nov 9, 2009

Lord Smith of Finsbury believes that implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity.

Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of what they are using.

If their “carbon account” hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits.

Those who are frugal with their carbon usage will be able to sell their unused credits and make a profit.

Lord Smith will call for the scheme to be part of a “Green New Deal” to be introduced within 20 years when he addresses the agency’s annual conference on Monday.

An Environment Agency spokesman said only those with “extravagant lifestyles” would be affected by the carbon allowances.

He said: “A lot of people who cycle will get money back. It will probably only be bankers and those with extravagant lifestyles who would lose out.”

However, some have criticised the move as “Orwellian” and say it will have a detrimental impact on business.

Ruth Lea, an economist from Arbuthnot Banking Group, told the Daily Mail: “This is all about control of the individual and you begin to wonder whether this is what the green agenda has always been about. It’s Orwellian. This will be an enormous tax on business.”

Under the Climate Change Act, Britain is obliged to cut its emissions by 80 per cent on 1990 levels by 2050. This means annual CO2 emissions per person will have to fall from about 9 tonnes to only 2 tonnes.

Australian PM Rudd warns skeptics ‘are too ‘dangerous to ignore’ and are ‘holding the world to ransom’ — Climate Depot Responds

‘Yes, we plead guilty to promoting ‘inaction’ — ‘Skeptics will proudly celebrate the collapse of Copenhagen Treaty’

Climate Depot | Nov 6, 2009

By Marc Morano

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd spewed out a rhetorical barrage on climate skeptics worldwide. See: Australian PM warns skeptics ‘are too ‘dangerous to ignore’ and are ‘holding the world to ransom’ – November 6, 2009.

Climate Depot has undertaken a point by point rebuttal to Rudd’s claims. The full text of Rudd’s speech is available here.

Rudd Claim: Skeptics are “powerful enough to threaten a deal on global climate change both in Copenhagen and beyond.”

Climate Depot Response: Yes, skepticism, the foundation of science, is and always has been strong enough to derail lavishly funded and politically motivated science based on wildly speculative climate model “predictions” and distortions of past climate records. A “scientifically meaningless” domestic carbon trading or international treaties will not impact global climate in any detectable ways, but will have huge human impacts.

Rudd Claim: Skeptics “constitute a powerful global force for inaction.”

Climate Depot Response: On the contrary, skeptics constitute a powerful force for scientific truth and morality based vibrant energy expansion to the developing world’s poor. To the extent that we can prevent “scientifically meaningless” climate treaties and regulations from passing, then yes, we plead guilty to promoting “inaction.” As former Thatcher science advisor Lord Christopher Monckton has said: “Climate change is a non-problem. The right answer to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.”

Rudd Claim: “Climate skeptics are quite literally holding the world to ransom.”

Climate Depot Response: Reality check Mr. Rudd. Science, economics and reality are holding man-made global warming fear promoters like Rudd to ransom. It must be frustrating Mr. Rudd to have once believed you could hoodwink the people of your nation and the world to believe in climate fears and your purely symbolic “solutions.” Polling data from the U.S., the UK, Canada and your Australia show the public growing more skeptical. (See: Polls: ‘More Americans believe in haunted houses than man-made global warming’ – 37% vs. 36% ) The only “ransom” involved in this debate is the financial demands placed on countries to redistribute money based on collapsing climate fears. See: Reparations: Africa seeks climate change cash…demands billions in compensation for ‘damage caused by global warming’ & Global Carbon Tax Urged at UN Climate Conference & ‘Controlling climate? More like controlling humans’: Beware of ‘unprecedented transfer of wealth, power and control to domestic and global governance’

Rudd Claim: Our “children’s fate – and our grandchildren’s fate – will lie entirely with [skeptics' opposition].

Climate Depot Response: Nice maudlin touch, Mr. Rudd. The fact is children are probably the only ones left that you and your climate fear promoting friends can convince that a climate catastrophe is just around the corner and you and your colleagues are their saviors. You are in luck, Mr. Rudd. Climate Depot takes full responsibility for the fate of your children and grandchildren from any future man-made climate catastrophe. Climate Depot can and will gladly take public responsibility for the children and future grandchildren of our planet for “doing nothing” about climate. So there, problem solved.

Rudd Claim: “The legion of climate change skeptics are active across the world…”

Climate Depot Response: Yes, you are very correct on this point Mr. Rudd. Scientists dissenting from silly and baseless man-made global warming fears are literally standing up around the world – from New Zealand to Canada to Brazil to Mexico to Sweden to South Africa to Japan to Portugal and everywhere in between. See: 2009 U.S. Senate Report: 700 Plus Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Warming Claims and see: ‘Series of inconvenient developments for promoters of man-made global warming fears continue unabated’

The shock to you Mr. Rudd is that even the mainstream media is not abandoning man-made climate fears. See: Losing Their Religion: 2009 officially declared year the media lost their faith in man-made global warming fears

Rudd Claim: “The clock is ticking for the planet, but the climate change skeptics simply do not care.

Climate Depot Response: What clock is “ticking?” The one the UN warned of a ten year tipping point in 1989? See: U.N. Warning of 10-Year ‘Climate Tipping Point’ Began in 1989

In addition, NASA’s James Hansen and former Vice President Al Gore started their comical “tipping point” clocks a few years ago, while Prince Charles claimed a 96-month tipping point in July 2009! Even more absurd, the UN chief further shortened the “tipping point,” warning of ‘incalculable’ suffering without climate deal in December 2009! The question looms: Would you buy a used car from a salesman using such low-brow tactics, let alone, buy into man-made climate fear claims? Mr. Rudd, you must believe the public to be nothing more than a bunch of rubes if you want them to believe your climate tripe. See: MIT Climate Scientist Richard Lindzen: ‘Ordinary people see through man-made climate fears — but educated people are very vulnerable’ – July 6, 2009

Rudd Claim: “The vested interests at work are simply too great.”

Climate Depot Response: What “vested interests?” You are not claiming that skeptics have some sort of funding that is in any way comparable to the tens of billions spent promoting climate fears, are you? See: Gore’s path to become the first ‘Carbon Billionaire’ and see: The Global Warming Science Machine: $79 Billion and Counting

Rudd Claim: Skeptics “are a political attempt to subvert what is now a longstanding scientific consensus…”

Climate Depot Response: “Longstanding scientific consensus?” Surely you jest. Man-made global warming fears did not come in widespread vogue until the late 1980’s. In case you missed it, many of today’s warmers were promoting global cooling as late as 1970’s. See: Climate Depot’s Factsheet on 1970s Coming ‘Ice Age’ Claims: ‘Fears of a coming ice age, showed up in peer-reviewed literature, at scientific conferences, by prominent scientists and throughout the media’ The man-made global warming hypothesis is now failing in the scientific community. See: UK Astrophysicist: ‘The notion that CO2 warms world has come to a dead end’: They are trying to ‘prop up a ’scientific theory’ that has run out of so called facts’ and see: UN IPCC Scientist Declares ‘A Death Spiral for Climate Alarmism’ and see: New Report: UN Scientists Speak Out On Global Warming — As Skeptics!

South African UN Scientist Dr. Will Alexander wrote in March 2009, “’The whole climate change issue is about to fall apart…Heads will roll!” UK scientist Dr. David Bellamy once believed man-made climate fears, but has since reversed his views and become a skeptic. “The ­science has, quite simply, gone awry. In fact, it’s not even science any more, it’s anti-science, Bellamy said in November 2008.

The news is so grim for man-made climate fear activists that they are already looking for the next environmental scare to hype! See: AGW RIP? Is It Time for Next Eco-Scare Already? Gore’s producer Laure David touts plastic crisis: ‘Plastic waste is in some ways more alarming for us humans than global warming’ – July 31, 2009 & UK Green Party: ‘There exists a more serious crisis than the ‘CO2 crisis’: the oxygen levels are dropping and the human activity has decreased them by 1/3 or ½’

Rudd Claim: The consensus is supported by “4000 scientists appointed by governments from virtually every country in the world.”

Climate Depot Response: Why not make up higher numbers? Why not just claim 50,000 UN scientists support the “consensus?” What silliness.

Reality Check: 2009 U.S. Senate Minority Report of dissenting scientists has pushed the total to over 700 skeptical international scientists – a dramatic increase from the original 650 scientists featured in the initial December 11, 2008 release. The 59 additional scientists added to the 255-page Senate Minority report since the initial release 13 ½ weeks ago represents an average of over four skeptical scientists a week. The over 700 dissenting scientists are now more than 13 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers. Update: Numbers Racket: Rudd blunders in claiming ‘4000′ UN scientists: Reality Check: Only 60 UN experts ‘explicitly supported the claim made by the IPCC that global warming represents a threat to the planet’ – Nov. 6, 2009

Here is a very small sampling of what current and former UN scientists have to say about the UN and its scientific methods.

“Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”

- UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.”

- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“Temperature measurements show that the [climate model-predicted mid-troposphere] hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them!”

- UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Steven M. Japar, a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions.

“I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol,” Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007.

- Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, served as a UN IPCC lead author in 2001 for the 3rd assessment report and detailed how he personally witnessed UN scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.”

- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil… I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.”

- South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.

“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri’s asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it’s hard to remain quiet.”

- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society’s Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

Rudd Claim: Skeptic “attempt to twist the agreed science in the direction of a predetermined political agenda to kill climate change action.”

Climate Depot Response: Very interesting choice of words – “agreed science” The “science” of man-made global warming fears is literally the best science politics can manufacture. See New Report: UN Scientists Speak Out On Global Warming — As Skeptics! The problem, Mr. Rudd, is that your view of “agreed science” is collapsing in real world data, peer-reviewed studies and a growing number of dissenting scientists. See: ‘Series of inconvenient developments for promoters of man-made global warming fears continue unabated’

Rudd Claim: “It reminds me of the efforts of the smoking lobby decades ago as they tried for years to politically subvert by so-called scientific means that there was any link between smoking and lung cancer.”

Climate Depot Response: Great analogy Mr. Rudd! Climate Depot agrees, the smoking analogy is very apt. But alas, it is the promoters of man-made climate fears that are mimicking the tobacco lobbyists actions. See: Climate Fear Promoters mimic tobacco industry tactics Excerpt: This [current climate fear promoting] strategy provides a positive “pro-science” public stance that masks the ignominious activity of institutional and professional persecution of numerous scientists whose honest work casts legitimate doubt upon the more alarmist projections of the supposed “consensus.” Like the tobacco industry, this campaign has: “Manufactured uncertainty and fear by stridently proclaiming certainty and consensus based on dubious and uncertain modeled results predicting disastrous consequences of a warmer climate.”

Rudd Claim: “What absolute political cowardice” [on the part of skeptics].

Climate Depot Response: Cowardice? Scientists have literally risked their careers to go against today’s politically motivated “consensus.” On the contrary, skeptics are courageous to wage a battle against the “agree science” you take as a matter of faith. See: EPA further muzzles global warming skeptic Dr. Alan Carlin – August 25, 2009 & Other climate fear promoters are using threats and intimidation to silence the climate debate. See: ‘Execute’ Skeptics! Shock Call To Action: ‘At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers’ — ‘Shouldn’t we start punishing them now?’ – June 3, 2009

Rudd Claim: “What an absolute failure of logic [by skeptics].”

Climate Depot Response: Logic? Let’s review Mr. Rudd. You are lamenting the fact that skeptics are opposed to a “scientifically meaningless” climate “solution” process that could condemn the estimated 1.6 billion energy impoverished people in the developing world to a continued nasty brutish and short existence based on collapsing scientific claims. See: India: ‘It is morally wrong for us to reduce emissions when 40% of Indians do not have access to electricity’ Skeptics promote a vibrant energy policy that promotes development and expands energy around the globe. The sooner we can eliminate the UN from climate and energy policy, the better off energy distribution and the developing world’s poor will become. The world needs energy initiatives, not anti-energy initiatives, and as we go forward, the less the United Nations has to do with climate and energy, the better. The only people “pitching a do-nothing approach to climate change” are the UN and the U.S. Congress. Why else would the Kyoto Protocol not even have a measurable impact on global temps (assuming they were correct on the science ) and it was fully enacted?

It is the U.S. Congress and the “scientifically meaningless” Waxman-Markey bill that even Obama’s EPA admits will not have a measurable impact on global Co2 levels, let alone any measurable or detectable impact on global temperatures. The man-made climate fear promoters have been “pitching a do-nothing approach to climate change…” since the movement’s launch in 1988 by consistently promoting purely symbolic “solutions” to global warming. Mr. Rudd, you claim that carbon trading and UN treaties are some sort of an “insurance” policy against global warming. But a simple question to ask is: Would you purchase fire insurance on your home that had a huge up front premium for virtually no payout if you home burned down? If you answered YES to such an “insurance” policy, then Congress and the UN has a deal for you with their cap-and-trade and climate legislation.

If we did actually face a man-made climate catastrophe and the “solutions” of the UN and Congress were our only hope, we would all be DOOMED!

Rudd Claim: Skeptics “are too dangerous to be ignored”

Climate Depot Response: Fully agree with you Mr. Rudd. Scientific truth, reality based economics are always “dangerous” to climate charlatans peddling their wares of a coming climate catastrophe. It used to be those who stood on street corners warning of the end times were thought of as nutcases, now those same views are held by world leaders. It is sad to see “climate astrology” replace actual science. See: Obama’s ‘Climate Astrologer’: Energy Sec. Chu claims he knows ‘what the future will be 100 years from now’: ‘Shouldn’t Chu be touting these scary predictions of the year 2100 on a boardwalk with a full deck of Tarot Cards? Sadly Mr. Rudd, it is you and your fellow climate alarm promoters that are touting faith based science.

Rudd Claim: “The danger skeptics pose is this – by collapsing political momentum towards national and global action on climate change, they collapse global political will to act at all. They are the stick that gets stuck in the wheel, that despite its size may yet bring the train to a complete stop.”

Climate Depot Response: We plead guilty Mr. Rudd! Our goal is simple: To bring the train to a complete stop. You did figure us out correctly on that point.

Rudd Claim: “Skeptics are well resourced and well represented by political conservatives in many, many countries.”

Climate Depot Response: Wrong again, Mr. Rudd. Politically left scientists and environmental activists are now dissenting from climate fears in growing numbers. See: Politically Left Scientists Now Rejecting Climate Fears – Jan. 2009

Rudd Claim: “This brigade of do-nothing climate change skeptics are dangerous because if they succeed, then it is all of us who will suffer.”

Climate Depot Response: Yes, scientific truth, economic reality and political realism are always “dangerous” to politically and ideologically motivated climate fear promoters. As for “suffering” from failure to “act”, please explain how UN treaties and carbon trading “save the planet?” Even the Washington Post understands climate reality. See: Wash. Post’s Moment of Clarity: ‘Carbon emissions will not be reduced by international bureaucrats sitting in a room and signing a piece of paper’ – July 14, 2009

Rudd Claim: “Their aim is not to convince every person on earth of the follies of acting on climate change. Their aim is to erode just enough of the political will that action becomes impossible.”

Climate Depot Response: Actually Mr. Rudd, the more messrs Gore, Kerry, Brown, Obama, and yourself speak, the more the public grows skeptical. So you and your colleagues have been a huge help in helping to spread skepticism and expand opposition to silly and economically destructive global climate treaties.

Rudd Claim: “If Copenhagen does not deliver the outcome we so urgently need, no individual climate change skeptic will be responsible, but each of them will have played their part.”

Climate Depot Response: Goody! Let us hope Copenhagen does not deliver! For the sake of the planet and its inhabitants. Skeptics will proudly celebrate the collapse of Copenhagen and do so knowing our children and grandchildren will be better off. Yes, our children and grandchildren will be much better off without a UN body that uses used-car salesman tactics dictating meaningless climate “action.”

Rudd Claim: “In this debate the climate change skeptics have erected an intellectual house of cards based on one simple premise: that the cost of not acting is nothing.”

Climate Depot Response: Actually, you have your logic reversed Mr. Rudd. The cost of doing “something” as defined by the U.S. Congress and the UN achieves “nothing” in results. It is all economic pain for no climate gain. At best under UN climate treaties, the world accomplishes “nothing” as far as climate goes, but we risk a neo-colonialism of Western nations imposing regulations on impoverished developing nations that can only be called immoral. See: Flashback 2002: U.S. Environmentalist Laments Introduction of Electricity in Africa; Flashback 2002: Jerry Brown says ‘it’s not viable’ for poverty stricken developing world to emulate prosperity of U.S.’ Ugandan Activist: ‘African life span is lower than it was in U.S. and Europe 100 years ago. But Africans told we shouldn’t develop’ because wealthy Western nations are ‘worried about global warming’: Excerpt: ‘Telling Africans they can’t have electricity and economic development – is immoral’; Flashback 2003: S. African Activist: Poor countries should just say: ‘Go to hell’ to Wealthy Western Nations: ‘If you don’t want us to fill in our wetlands, then you bomb your big cities like Washington, a third of Holland and Rotterdam and so on, and restore them to being swamps’; Flashback 2002: UN Earth Summit’s Failure Called ‘Good Thing’ For Poor Nations: Excerpt: The first world became rich without the IMFs and World Banks, and the less of them that are around, the more likely the Third World is to do the same.”; It is a moral issue! – ‘People cannot cook’…Chad’s Global Warming Inspired Ban on Charcoal leads to ‘Desperate’ Families! – January 16, 2009

Poor Kenyans rebel as UK grocery store’s “carbon friendly” policies may stop food exports; India: ‘It is morally wrong for us to reduce emissions when 40% of Indians do not have access to electricity’

Report: ‘Green, UN, rich nation and African elites impose deadly anti-development colonialism’ – June 8, 2009; Greenpeace Leader: There is urgent need for the suppression of economic growth in U.S…’Lifestyle of the rich in the world is not a sustainable model’ – August 20, 2009; Flashback 2002: Average American Lifestyle Called “Total Bull—t” by Environmentalist – Excerpt: ‘If anyone in a developing country looks to the U.S. and wants a lifestyle like the average American–it’s total bull—t!’; Flashback 2000: Actor Chevy Chase Says ‘Socialism Works’ — ‘Cuba might prove that’; Black clergymen protest Robert Redford ‘link his environmentalism to racism’; Obama Advisor Warren Buffett ‘repeats criticism of cap and trade, saying it would be a huge, regressive tax’

Rudd Claim: “Skeptics claim that the cost of not acting is nothing.”

Climate Depot Response: Wrong again. Skeptics claim that RESULT of “acting” is nothing in terms of climate results.

Rudd Claim: “Their skepticism is in fact radical in its riskiness and recklessness. By deliberately undermining and eroding the capacity to achieve both domestic and international action on climate change the skeptics are attempting to force the world to take the single most reckless bet in our long history.”

Climate Depot Response: Mr. Rudd, you repeat yourself ad nauseum. There is no “reckless” bet. The way forward is already happening. Improving technologies, expanding energy and growing economies in the developing world will improve the global environment more than any UN treaty or domestic carbon trading ever conceivably could.

Rudd Claim: “Skeptics are doing so in the total absence of any genuine body of evidence.”

Climate Depot Response: Oh please Mr. Rudd. Here is but a sampling of the latest scientific studies and real world data that are challenging your politically motivated science views. See: ‘Series of inconvenient developments for promoters of man-made global warming fears continue unabated’

Rudd Claim: “The logic of these skeptics belongs in a casino, not a science lab, and not in the ranks of any responsible government…their prescription for inaction has all the legitimacy of a roulette wheel.”

Climate Depot Response: The casino analogy is apt. People are being told that we must enact a new UN climate treaty or face certain doom. The problem is the casino is run by the UN and it is loaded with corruption. (See: Internal Report Says U.N. Climate Agency Rife With Bad Practices – Fox News – December 4, 2008 )The UN casino pit bosses are offering a sucker bet. Put all your money on a “climate treaty” or “carbon trading” and you will be allowed to live. Don’t do it and you will face bodily harm and loss of property. It’s an offer you can’t refuse. See: La Cosa Climate: Commerce Sec. Warns: Americans Need ‘To Pay’ Or Face Mother Nature’s Wrath — Pay up or face ‘floods, droughts and rising sea levels’: An offer you can’t refuse — Pay up or world faces a ‘catastrophe’

Congressional Weather-Makers: ‘Climate Astrologer’ Boxer warns of ‘droughts, floods, fires, loss of species’ — if Senate fails to pass climate bill

What UN casino is not telling patrons is that the “climate treaty” bet is nothing more than pure symbolism that could harm the poorest of residents. People are wising up, gambling with the UN is not a winning bet.

Rudd Claim: “You are betting our jobs, our houses, our farms, our reefs, our economy and our future on an intuition – on a gut feeling; on a political prejudice you have about science…You’ve got to know when to fold ‘em – and for the skeptics, that time has come.

Climate Depot Response: Aha, yes, the time to fold has arrived. Here is a very small sampling of the current reality you want to deny Mr. Rudd: See: ‘Series of inconvenient developments for promoters of man-made global warming fears continue unabated’ and ‘Dramatic acceleration of developments against the claims of a so-called ‘consensus.’

UN Fears (More) Global Cooling Commeth! IPCC Scientist Warns UN: We may be about to enter ‘one or even 2 decades during which temps cool’

‘Sun Sleeps’: Danish Scientist declares ‘global warming has stopped and a cooling is beginning…enjoy global warming while it lasts’

Prominent Russian Scientist: ‘We should fear a deep temperature drop — not catastrophic global warming’ : ‘Warming had a natural origin…CO2 is ‘not guilty’

nzherald.co.nz | Nov 9, 2009

By Guy Adams

The Fort Hood massacre could lead to an ugly “backlash” against the 3,000 Muslims who serve in the US Army, its chief of staff warned yesterday.

General George Casey toured breakfast television studios to emphasise that the mass shooting, in which 13 died and 29 were wounded, must not be used to excuse discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities in the Armed Forces.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the 39-year-old army psychiatrist accused of last Thursday’s atrocity, had yelled “Alahu Akbar” as he opened fire on his fellow-soldiers.

“I’m concerned [about] a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers and I’ve asked our army leaders to be on the lookout for that,” he said.

“Our diversity, not only in our army, but in our country, is a strength. As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.”

Army CID investigators have said there was no evidence that Major Hasan, in hospital recovering from four bullet wounds, was part of a wider terrorist conspiracy.

Evidence from his computer, together with family interviews, suggest that he acted alone.

Psychological problems also appear to have contributed to the attack.

The suspect was ideologically opposed to the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, which he had referred to as part of “a war on Islam”, and he had been desperate to avoid an imminent posting to the Middle East, The New York Times reported.

He was also emotionally scarred from his counselling work.

Major Hasan had recently contributed to extremist internet forums.

But there is no evidence that he had contact with a known terrorist.

Neither did the mass shooting seem designed to advance a specific political agenda.

He is under armed guard in hospital in Texas.

Yesterday, he was taken off a ventilator.

If he survives, prosecutors say he is likely to face prosecution in the military rather than civilian courts.

The independent Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman has announced that he intends to lead a government investigation into the incident, to get to the bottom of suggestions that the army missed “strong warning signs” that Major Hasan was a potential threat.

He once had links to the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia.

Newspaper reports said the mosque was attended by two of the 9/11 hijackers.

But the mosque’s influence on Major Hasan’s recent behaviour is debatable as there is no evidence that he had visited it for some years.