Saturday, June 25, 2016
Deadly California wildfire destroys at least 150 homes? Here Come Al Gore And Friend's Blaming This , You Guess It Global Warming
In intense wildfire in central California has destroyed 150 homes and the number may yet rise, fire officials said Saturday.
The tally rose from 80 homes as firefighters began going through neighborhoods to count houses and mobile homes incinerated by the blaze.
Entire blocks were reduced to rubble, and at least 2,500 homes remained threatened.
Weather conditions that drove the fire through small southern Sierra Nevada communities with terrifying speed remained a worry, with low humidity and 30-mph steady winds forecast.
"That's something we have to keep an eye on. It could spark another disaster," Kern County fire Engineer Anthony Romero said.
About 1,100 firefighters battled the flames.
Gov. Jerry Brown declared a state of emergency, freeing up money and resources to fight the fire and to clean up in the aftermath. The Federal Emergency Management Agency also authorized the use of funds for firefighting efforts.
Since it began Thursday, the fire has swept through 35,711 acres — nearly 56 square miles — of parched brush and timber. It moved so quickly that some residents barely had time to escape — and two didn't.
An elderly couple apparently were overcome by smoke as they tried to flee, county Sheriff Donny Youngblood said. Their bodies were found Friday but their names haven't been released.
Everett Evans, 45, fled Thursday as the fire came down a mountain with a roar toward his South Lake mobile home.
"When you hear a freight train, it's time to leave. You could hear it, you could see it, you could smell it," he said.
Evans said he knocked on doors to get neighbors to leave. Evans and his father, son and his son's girlfriend were in the convoy.
But he has nothing left to come back to. Virtually no homes survived in his neighborhood. A reporter visiting on Saturday found only a burned flag blowing in the wind on a flagpole above the rubble of Evans' home.
Evans hadn't been allowed back to the home but said he lost mementos and photos from his former marriage and years in the Marine Corps.
"That's all memories. You get to keep your life but you lose your memories," he said.
Shiela McFarland, 67, from Mountain Mesa, left her home three days ago, taking her computer, cellphone, papers and her miniature poodle, Snuggles.
At an evacuation center, she slept on a cot outdoors next to his kennel.
McFarland said she didn't know whether her home survived, but she was philosophical.
"It doesn't matter if I've lost everything," she said Saturday. "I've got my little dog, my kids and my grandkids. I've seen other people in worse shape."
The fire tore through small communities of houses and mobile homes that surround the lake — actually a reservoir — and the Kern River, a popular spot for fishing and whitewater rafting. The communities are nestled in foothills of the Sierra Nevada, a mountain range that runs hundreds of miles north and south through eastern California.
Scorching heat and tinder-dry conditions across the West have contributed to massive wildfires in the past week that have destroyed properties and sent residents to seek shelter and hope for the best.
Laura Rogers was one of those who thought she'd never see her home or her brother's home again. Instead, she was lucky to find both standing in a neighborhood of mobile homes that was devastated.
"I was sure this place was gone last night," Rogers said through tears Friday as she gestured at the destruction around her. "I mean look at this, I can't believe it. It's like a scary movie."
The downspout of her brother's home was melted on the ground, but the structure was intact.
Dozens of other homes were gone, left in piles of charred sheet metal and cinderblock foundations. Scorched tricycles, air conditioners and TV dishes littered the landscape. Burned-out cars sat on tireless rims and leafless trees poked from barren, blackened dirt.
Friday, June 24, 2016
Thursday, June 23, 2016
Saturday, June 18, 2016
While some point to global warming as the culprit, an article published by Watts Up With That — a site run by Anthony Watts, a meteorologist and founder of the ‘Surface Stations project‘ — on Wednesday shows the ‘Great Flood Of Paris’ in 1910 saw water levels rise to over 20 feet above normal long before global warming was an issue.
Thursday, June 9, 2016
Barack Obama insists that Americans have to take climate change seriously, or else a key part of one the world’s greatest cities could end up underwater.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s most powerful regulatory weapon is its ability to regulate fine particulate matter (like soot and dust) in outdoor air. This fine particulate matter is called PM2.5 (pronounced “Pee-Em-Two-Point-Five”). PM2.5 is about 1/20 the width of a human hair. PM2.5 may be natural (e.g., forest fires, volcanoes, dust, pollen, mold) or manmade (e.g., power plant smokestacks, vehicle exhaust).
The EPA has used PM2.5-based regulations to help destroy the U.S. coal industry. These include the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and Mercury Air Transport Standards. The EPA relied more on PM2.5 than greenhouse gases to justify its global warming rules known as the Clean Power Plan. The EPA’s recent ozone rules, reputed to be the most expensive EPA rules ever, are about 90% dependent on EPA’s claims about PM2.5.
The EPA claims that stringent regulation of PM2.5 is necessary because PM2.5 supposedly kills hundreds of thousands of Americans annually after either long-term (decades) or short-term (hours, days) inhalation exposures (i.e., breathing normal air).
The EPA has given researchers about $581 million to research the supposed health effects of inhaling particulate matter from outdoor air. Here, we will debunk the notion that PM2.5kills on a long-term basis — at a cost of about $5.
Consider a nonsmoker and a limited smoker who smokes, say, 10 cigarettes (one-half pack) a day for 15 years.
1. On average, both the nonsmoker and limited smoker will inhale about 7 grams of PM2.5 from outdoor air during the course of an typical 80 year lifetime.
Calculation details: Typical U.S. air contains about 10 millionths of a gram (microgram) of PM2.5 per cubic meter. The average person inhales about a cubic meter of air per hour. So a typical person will inhale about 240 micrograms of PM2.5 per day. Over an 80-year life time, this works out to 7,008,000 micrograms of PM2.5 inhaled (240 micrograms/day x 365 days x 80 years). Then 7,008,000 micrograms = 7.008 grams.2. In addition to the 7 grams of PM2.5 from outdoor air, the smoker will also inhale another 547.5 to 2,190 grams of PM2.5 from smoking.
Calculation details: A smoker can anywhere from 10,000 to 40,000 micrograms of PM2.5 from a single cigarette. Someone who smokes 10 cigarettes per day for 15 years will smoke 54,750 cigarettes during that period. So the 15-year, half-pack-per-day smoker will inhale an additional 547.5 grams to 2,190 grams of PM2.5 during his lifetime (10,000 micrograms/cigarette x 54,750 cigarettes; 40,000 micrograms/cigarette x 54,750 cigarettes).3. According to a recent 2013 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, the limited smoker has a normal life expectancy. The study abstract is below. Note highlighted text.
4. So the nonsmoker who inhales 7 grams of PM2.5 and the limited smoker who inhales as much as 2,197 grams of PM2.5 have the same life expectancy.
5. This comparison can be visualized as follows. The nonsmoker will inhale only approximately 2 sugar packets worth of PM2.5…
Calculation details. A sugar packet contain 3.54 grams of sugar.6. … while the limited smoker will inhale over 4.8 pounds worth of PM2.5
Calculation details. 1 gram = 0.00220462 pounds. So 2,197 grams = 4.84 pounds. They don’t make 4.84 pound bags of sugar but they do sell 4 pound bags of sugar that look like this:7. So to summarize in a picture:
Sunday, June 5, 2016
Thursday, June 2, 2016
You would think the group of 20 or so climate change scientists who sent a letter to President Obama urging him to prosecute climate skeptics under the RICO statute would have consulted a PR firm before they made asses of themselves to the whole country.
But now, the learned men of science have hired Climate Nexus, a PR firm specializing in spinning global warming news. The letter has been withdrawn - a move the PR firm called a "big mistake" - and a different strategy will be employed.
In the days after 20 professors fired off a letter urging President Obama to investigate climate skeptics for suspected federal racketeering charges, the climate change movement went into full damage-control mode.
Philip Newell, creative media manager of the public relations firm Climate Nexus, described the Sept. 1 letter as “a big mistake,” advising activists and scientists to downplay the prosecution angle and spin the story away from individuals and toward fossil fuel companies, according to emails obtained Wednesday by The Washington Times.
He cited reports on the skeptics’ website, Climate Audit, saying that although it “isn’t a site to be worried about, it’s definitely looking like this issue isn’t going to go away, even if you remove the letter, which I hear has been done and I would say is a big mistake.”
The letter was first posted on the Institute for Global Environment and Security website and then reportedly removed, but was then posted on other websites.
“I’d recommend you keep it up and point to it as a call for investigating (not prosecuting) organizations and companies (not specific scientists) in an oped or simply a statement on the IGES website that clarifies that distinction,” Mr. Newell said in a Sept. 29 email.
Not everyone has taken that advice. Months later, Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude E. Walker issued subpoenas to ExxonMobil calling for its communications with more than 100 universities, scientists and think tanks, as well as the free market nonprofit Competitive Enterprise Institute.
The goal of the AG's pushing this witch hunt is not to prosecute fossil fuel companies, but to hold the threat of prosecution over their heads to extort tens of billions of dollars from them in a grand settlement a la the tobacco companies. The scientists actually believed the AG's were serious about stringing up individuals and think tanks who make their lives difficult by challenging their findings. But you can't get blood out of a turnip so it's hardly worth the effort of the AG's to go after the small fry.
The PR firm disabused the scientists of the notion that this investigation was about creating an inquisition for climate skeptics. Instead, gangster fashion, the full resources of government will be brought to bear on oil, coal, and natural gas companies to extract climate change tribute - a mutli-billion dollar slush fund that will be used to show favor to supporters and enrich political cronies.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/06/withdrawal_of_letter_by_climate_change_scientists_urging_prosecution_of_skeptics_deemed_a_mistake_pr_firm.html#ixzz4ASYkXRyJ
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook