No Cajones, al-Gore?

Gore allegedly afraid to debate Klaus
Former U.S. vice-president Albert Gore allegedly feared a direct confrontation with Czech President Vaclav Klaus at a conference on global warming, and this is why Gore's presentation was rescheduled for another day, Lidove noviny (LN) writes Thursday, referring to Klaus's spokesman.

Klaus will take part in the two-day international conference in Santa Barbara, the United States, on Friday, March 6 when he was to get involved in polemics with Gore, one of the main supporters of the global warming theory, which Klaus is sharply challenging.

However, Gore, a Nobel Peace prize winner, will speak at the conference Thursday. The organisers have changed the programme at the very last moment, LN writes.

"A dialogue (between Klaus and Gore) was to take place on one stage. We accepted the U.S. proposal positively. But the organisers reassessed the idea in the end," Klaus's spokesman Radim Ochvat told the paper.

"Gore might have feared such a clash," he added.

Indeed. As Jammie posted earlier, al-Goracle is scared shitless of an honest debate.

However the reason was allegedly more pragmatic, LN notes.

The organisers decided to change the conference programme to attract the maximum attention on both days as Klaus and Gore are the key speakers at the conference, LN writers, referring to a source close to the organisers.

Klaus will also touch upon global warming in his 30-minute speech titled "Europe, Global Warming and the Current Economic Crisis: As Seen from Prague" at the Columbia University in New York on Monday, Ochvat told LN.

Klaus has repeatedly criticised Gore for not being willing to listen to other climate theories.

Most recently, Klaus commented on global warming at the economic forum in Davos, Switzerland, in early February. In his speech Klaus said "the environmental militant approach to global warming" was challenging human freedom.

Klaus also presented his stances on climate change theory in his answers to the questions of U.S. Congressmen two years ago, and in his latest book "Blue, Not Green Planet."

'Global warming' expert Timothy Geithner was unavailable for comment.

Via The Prague Monitor

Hypocrisy Thy Name Is al-Gore

Yesterday, during al-Gore's call for Congressional complicity in creating a ten-year plan (Damn, if that don't sound familiar!) to enlarge his personal get rich scheme combat global warming climate change whatever in Hell the Religion of Environmentalism™ is calling this hoax, there were some demonstrators outside.

al-Gore's fleet of vehicles was parked there, too.

The Lincoln Town Car used by Tipper and the daughter was idling.

With the air conditioner on.

Pictures or it's bullshit?

You got it.

Video courtesy of Americans For Prosperity

H/T Mark

al-Gore Hoax Alert

Winter's return causes confusion
Heavy snow falls were seen in many parts of northern Sweden on Saturday as winter made a comeback. Forecasts indicate however that this should be the last snow of the season.

The snow falls caused widespread power cuts.

"I am just heading out to shovel the snow, it's feels a little tough. I measured this morning and 24 centimetres [9.4 inches] of snow had fallen during the morning," said Evelyn Nykvist in Sörskog in Dalarna to news agency TT.

The snow falls covered much of Dalarna, inner Hälsingland, Härjedalen and up towards Jämtland and the ski resort of Åre. Swedish meteorological agency SMHI reported that 14-15 centimetres [5.5 - 6 inches] of snow fell in Leksand, Malung and Rättvik in Dalarna.

"It has snowed quite a lot, as far south as parts of Värmland. Further south than that the snow turns into slush," said SMHI meteorologist Sten Laurin.

Many residents in the affected areas have suffered confusion in May as one day they cycle to work and the next have to rummage around in their attics to dig out winter clothes, hats and gloves.

Svealand (the central region of the three regions that makes up Sweden) has not seen snow in May since 2005. Forecasts indicate that this will be the last of the season's snow.

Theres was some chaos on the roads as many motorists had already switched to summer tyres. Several cars slid off roads in the Falun-Borlänge area.

"But there have not been any accident involving injuries to people," said Christer Nelefelt at Dalarna police.

Several thousand households were without electricity in parts of Svealand as the heavy, wet snow weighed down power lines on Saturday morning. Problems persisted for many into the afternoon.

al-Goracle was unavailable for comment.

Via The Local

I Hear A Trainwreck Comin' . . .

While Dubya's joined McCain in capitulating to the Religion of Environmentalism, a major chink has appeared in the armor of al-Gore's 'global warming' scam.

Pressure Grows on EU to Abandon Biofuels
With food prices skyrocketing and faith in biofuels plummeting, many are demanding that the European Union back away from its commitment to eco-fuel. Even the EU's own scientists are skeptical.

Uh-oh. There goes al-Gore's holy consensus.

The timing can, at best, be described as awkward. On Tuesday, the United Kingdom's new biofuel regulations went into effect, requiring that 2.5 percent of fuel sold at pumps in the UK be made up of fuel made from grains and grass. By 2010, the mixture will be boosted to 5 percent -- all in an effort to drastically reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that gets pumped into the atmosphere.

But the regulation comes during a week of mounting critique against biofuels. With unrest around the world growing (more...) due to rising food prices, many are beginning to point their fingers at ethanol and biodiesel as important culprits. Even as the new UK regulations enact ambitious European Union goals aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the EU itself is facing increasing pressure to abandon its goal of seeing all fuel sold at pumps in Europe contain 10 percent biofuels by 2020.

First generation biofuels "don't hold as much potential environmental benefits as people thought when they embarked on these policies," Stefan Tangermann, Director of the Trade and Agricultural Directorate for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "We must come to the conclusion that maybe it is time to revisit our commitment to biofuels."

[....]

Ouch.

Read it all at Spiegel International.




自由西藏

Law of Unintended Consequences Or Just Old Eugenics?

They're going to starve the children and kill all of the old people!

Not the Rethuglians, though. al-Gore, along with his cadre of schmuck scientists and hysterical psychophants.

UN chief calls for review of biofuels policy

• Ban Ki-moon speaks out amid global food shortage
  
• 33 countries facing unrest as families go hungry
  

The UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, has called for a comprehensive review of the policy on biofuels as a crisis in global food prices — partly caused by the increasing use of crops for energy generation — threatens to trigger global instability.

"We need to be concerned about the possibility of taking land or replacing arable land because of these biofuels," Ban told the Guardian in Bucharest while attending this week's Nato summit. But he added: "While I am very much conscious and aware of these problems, at the same time you need to constantly look at having creative sources of energy, including biofuels. Therefore, at this time, just criticising biofuel may not be a good solution. I would urge we need to address these issues in a comprehensive manner."

How about a simple, straightforward German analysis? No sense in wasting any more time.

Climate change has been a priority for Ban since he took over from Kofi Annan, and he has embraced the potential of biofuels, derived from plants, as a long-term substitute for fossil fuels. But as food prices have soared — driven by rising demand, high fuel costs, and climate change — the cultivation of biofuels has come under fire for diverting fertile land from food production.

Some of the loudest criticism has come from within UN food agencies, which are struggling to keep up with commodity prices. Last month the World Food Programme issued an emergency $500m appeal to donors to help it meet its existing commitments to the world's hungry.

WFP officials say 33 countries in Asia and Africa face political instability as the urban poor struggle to feed their families.

There are also mounting concerns over the benefits of biofuels to the environment. They generally burn cleaner than fossil fuels, but fuels such as grain-based ethanol are energy-intensive to produce, and tropical rainforests have been cleared to produce palm oil for use as a fuel.

The role of biofuels is under review in Britain pending an inquiry into the indirect impact of their cultivation by the Renewable Fuels Agency.

How about considering these reviews? No sense in wasting any more time — or money.

Against this backdrop some senior UN officials are pushing for a change of policy, and attack Ban in private. "Ban is just out of touch," one said. " He doesn't know what is really going on in our agencies."

Ya nitwit! Why do think the movers and shakers nominated him?

The UN's own special rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler, called biofuels "a crime against humanity", and called for a five-year moratorium.

Let's see if anyone in The Hague has balls enough to at least investigate al-Gore for crimes against humanity. Profiting from the misery he's visiting upon the Third World and urban poor, it's not as if he can't afford a lawyer.

Better yet, just sue the bastard.

Ban rejected that proposal. "At this time I wouldn't make any definitive judgment or definitive plans, in particular vis-à-vis these biofuels," he said. "I know there are some concerns raised by certain quarters about biofuels. But biofuels are a renewable source of energy when we are experiencing extreme difficulties [with] resources."

But Ban conceded that there was a food supply problem and said the primary Millenium Development Goal of halving global hunger by 2015 looked harder to reach than ever. "This steeply rising food price is a new phenomenon," he said. "We have only seven years left to meet the target of 2015. This is very serious."

It was all forseeable, asshat. It's called supply and demand.

He said he was overseeing a multi-agency investigation of the issue involving the UN Energy Programme, the UN Development Programme, the Department of Economic and Social Affairs and the World Food Programme. "They are all working on this issue," the secretary-general said.

So were the UN's Oil for Food folks.

Via The Guardian.

When asked if man was ruining Earth, Czech President Vaclav Klaus replied, "Perhaps only Mr. Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing.... For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa. It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature — by eliminating private ownership and similar things — much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago."

Ouch. ;-)

A Global Warming 'Denier' Sounds Off

The Global Warming Bubble
You didn’t have to be a rocket scientist in the 1990s to figure that speculative investment in dot-coms with no revenues would be disastrous. The same goes for lenders giving mortgages to borrowers with no job, no income and no assets. So after surviving the tech bubble and while trying to extricate the economy from the housing bubble, why are we bent on heading into the global warming bubble?

Just this week, the Environmental Protection Agency issued its economic analysis of the Lieberman-Warner global warming bill that is now being considered by the Senate. The EPA projects that, if the bill is enacted, the size of our economy as measured by its gross domestic product (GDP) would shrink by as much as $2.9 trillion by the year 2050. That’s a 6.9 percent smaller economy than we might otherwise have if no action was taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Sen. James Inhofe (eeeeevil Republican-OK) notes that the fiscal impact to consumers will include a 44% increase in the cost of electricity.

For an idea of what that might mean, consider our current economic crisis. During the fourth quarter of 2007, GDP actually increased by 0.6 percent, yet trepidation still spread among businesses, consumers and the financial markets. Though the EPA says that Lieberman-Warner would send our economy in the opposite direction by more than a factor of 10, few in Congress seem concerned. For more perspective, consider that during 1929 and 1930, the first two years of the Great Depression, GDP declined by 8.6 percent and 6.4 percent, respectively.

And what would we get for such a massive self-inflicted wound? It ought to be something that is climatically spectacular, right? You be the judge.

The EPA says that by the year 2095—45 years after GDP has been slashed by 6.9 percent—atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels would be 25 parts per million (ppm) lower than if no greenhouse gas regulation was implemented.

Keeping in mind that the current atmospheric CO2 level is 380 ppm and the projected 2095 CO2 level is about 500 ppm, according to the EPA, what are the potential global temperature implications for such a slight change in atmospheric CO2 concentration? Not much, as average global temperature would only be reduced by a maximum of about 0.10 to 0.20 degrees Celsius, according to existing research.

Oh, c'mon! If there was a shred of truth to this, al-Gore would have told us so in his award-winning documentary propaganda film.

Sacrificing many trillions of dollars of GDP for a trivial, 45-year-delayed and merely hypothetical reduction in average global temperature must be considered as exponentially more asinine than the dot-bombs of the late-1990s and the NINJA subprime loans that we now look upon scornfully.

So who in their right mind would push for this?

I met many of them up-close-and-personal last week at a major Wall Street Journal conference at which I was an invited speaker.

My fellow speakers included many CEOs (from General Electric, Wal-Mart, Duke Energy, and Dow Chemical, to name just a few), California’s Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the heads of several environmental activist groups.

The audience ― a sold-out crowd of hundreds who had to apply to be admitted and pay a $3,500 fee ― consisted of representatives of the myriad businesses that seek to make a financial killing from climate alarmism. There were representatives of the solar, wind, and biofuel industries that profit from taxpayer mandates and subsidies, representatives from financial services companies that want to trade permits to emit CO2, and public relations and strategic consultants to all of the above.

We libertarians would call such an event a rent-seekers ball ― the vast majority of the audience was there to plot how they could lock-in profits from government mandates on taxpayers and consumers.

It was an amazing collection of pseudo-entrepreneurs who were absolutely impervious to the scientific and economic facts that ought to deflate the global warming bubble.

In the interlude between presentations by the CEOs of Dow Chemical and Duke Energy, for example, the audience was shown a slide ― similar to this one ― of the diverging relationship between atmospheric CO2 levels and average global temperature since 1998. That slide should have caused jaws to drop and audience members to ponder why anyone is considering regulating CO2 emissions in hopes of taming global climate.

Instead, it was as if the audience did a collective blink and missed the slide entirely. When I tried to draw attention to the slide during my presentation, it was as if I was speaking in a foreign dialect.

The only conclusion I could come to was that the audience is so steeped in anticipation of climate profiteering that there is no fact that will cause them to reconsider whether or not manmade global warming is a reality.

The callousness of their blind greed was also on display at the conference.

Heh. They were just demonstrating what's been learned from the high priest of the Religion of Environmentalism.

In an instantaneous poll, the Wall Street Journal asked the audience to select the most pressing societal problem from a list of five that included infectious disease (malaria, AIDs, etc.), terrorism, and global warming.

Global warming was the most popular response, receiving 31 percent of the vote, while infectious disease was far behind in last place with only 3 percent of the vote. It’s an amazing result given that billions are sickened, and millions die every year from infectious disease. The consequences of future global warming, on the other hand, are entirely speculative.

Finally, I was astounded by the double-speak practiced by the global warmers.

Nothing to be astounded about. Fluency in double-speak is the cult hallmark.

Virtually every speaker at the conference professed that they were either in favor of free markets or that they supported a free-market solution to global warming. But invariably in their next breath, they would plead for government regulation of greenhouse gases and government subsidies for alternative energy.

And the next POTUS will gladly sign whatever obscenely generous give-away legislation lands on his/her desk.

It’s hard to conceive of any good coming from a public policy in which facts play no substantial role in its development and words have no meaning in its public debate.

Steve Milloy

Via Canada Free Press

I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”. ― Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic

At Play In The Fields Of al-Gore

New green taxes for 'gas-guzzling' cars
Motorists face having to pay new green taxes as ministers step up their war on "gas-guzzling" cars.

The Government wants to get people out of high-emissions vehicles by making them more expensive, while also cutting the cost of driving for more environmentally-friendly options.

Two recently published reports commissioned by the Department for Transport examine the impact of raising the cost of buying the most polluting cars, and of increasing running costs by raising road tax or fuel prices.

Let's be honest. The increase in running costs will come about by raising the road tax and fuel prices.

Labour's plans, although not as advanced, echo those announced by the Tories last year. David Cameron's advisors drafted a series of "green supertaxes" which would add as much as £3,000 (US$5,940.89) in tax to the showroom price of bigger cars.

The first detailed report, by Cambridge Econometrics, sought to identify policies that "might be used to reduce CO2 emissions from road transport."

It said its findings confirmed "the prior beliefs of the DfT", that people buying cars in the middle tax bands were most likely to be affected by small changes in both purchase price and running costs.

A £3,000 'green supertax' would be a small change in the purchase price. rofl

According to the report, these drivers are most likely to choose more environmentally friendly cars next time they go into the showroom.

This was reinforced by a second study, by the Economics for the Environment Consultancy, which examined what would happen if only 1 per cent was added to the showroom price of new cars.

The economists found the biggest impact on carbon dioxide emissions came when prices were hiked up for cars in the middle of the market, between 141 grams CO2 per kilometre and 225.

In this range - encompassing a Ford Fiesta 1.4 to a Ford Focus 2.5 - the change in price would see large numbers of motorists buying greener cars.

The DfT said the studies were "routine research" without any policy recommendations.

But the willingness of the DfT to commission them is significant, given that Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, has ordered his own report on how motorists can be encouraged to chose greener cars.

That study, from Professor Julia King, vice-chancellor of Aston University, is due to be presented before the next budget.

Last night the Tories welcomed the Government's readiness to adopt green motoring taxes.

[...]

But the AA voiced alarm at the prospect of yet more motoring taxes.

"National and local government are coming up with yet more schemes which are financially punitive for car owners and their families," said a spokesman.

[...]

Read it all at The Telegraph

The American Left salivates.

Got 'Global Warming'?

No small wonder that Gordon Brown is adamant about denying the Brits his previously promised referendum on the new EU Constitution Treaty of Lisbon.

Brussels demands thousands more wind turbines across the UK

Britain will be forced to build thousands more wind turbines in the countryside under a Brussels edict to be announced tomorrow.

Energy experts say new EU climate change targets mean the UK will have to generate 40 per cent of its electricity from green sources within 12 years.

In order to meet that target, the number of wind turbines on the land would have to rise fourfold. Thousands more would be needed at sea.

The move would be one of the greatest engineering projects in years - and dramatically change the skyline of Britain and its coastal waters.

But critics say onshore turbines are an expensive blot on the landscape that often fail to generate enough power to justify their existence.

The Government concedes that the shift away from coal and gas will cost up to £6billion [US$23.23 billion] a year. Most of that burden will be passed to consumers.

As the costs of most government mandates are.

The move is part of the EU's commitment to generating 20 per cent of Europe's energy from renewable sources by 2020.

Under the plans - approved by Tony Blair - every member state will be told its contribution to the "green energy revolution" tomorrow. Britain currently has one of the worst records for renewable energy in Europe.

Years of cheap gas mean that nine out of ten homes use gas central heating, while hydroelectric and wind power produces just 2 per cent of electricity.

Tomorrow, the petulant bitch known as the European Union Brussels is expected to demand that 15 per cent of Britain's energy, including heating, transport fuel and electricity, comes from renewable sources by 2020. Because it would cost too much to convert homes and vehicles to green energy, the bulk of the target will have to be met by electricity companies.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs estimates that 40 per cent of electricity will have to be renewable within 12 years.

If it fails to meet the targets - described by civil servants as "difficult" - Europe will impose daily fines on the UK.

[...]

Read it all at The Daily Mail

I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”. --- Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic

Previously: Global Warming Scam to Cost EU $100 Billion

Also at A Tangled Web

'Global warming' claims another victim

Anybody seen the Hero of the Revolution, al-Goracle?

Chocolate and bonbon prices to skyrocket
BRUSSELS – Chocolate and bonbons will become much more expensive in the coming year and quality could become poorer, according to insiders in the chocolate market in Belgium and Switzerland, the leading chocolate producers in Europe.

The reasons behind this are the increasing demand from China and the poorer cocoa quality because of unrest in the largest production country, Ivory Coast. The cocoa plantations in Malaysia have largely been replaced by more lucrative palm oil plantations for bio-fuel.

Top Belgian chocolatier Galler announced a 10-percent increase in prices on Tuesday. "In the long term we are heading for scarcity and even higher prices," Justine Galler said in Het Laatste Nieuws.

CEO Patrick de Maeseneire of Swiss company Barry-Callebaut predicts increases of 12 to 15 percent this month. It is not that easy to step up cocoa bean production, he warned. "Planting more beans and harvesting good quality cocoa takes five to seven years."

Via Expatica

Such mishegas, 'global warming'.

"Most of the models couldn't predict the past"

al-Goracle, line one, please.

Global Con-sensus
December 21, 2007: 08:05 PM EST

Dec. 24, 2007 (Investor's Business Daily delivered by Newstex) --

Climate Change: A Senate minority report lists 400 reputable scientists who think the only melting ice we should really fear was in the cocktail glasses of attendees at the recent global warming conference in Bali.

In the wake of the Dec. 3-14 conference, where delegates worked to draft a successor to the failed Kyoto Protocol on global warming, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has released a report that lists scientists who challenge both Al Gore's assertion that the debate is over and the Bali conclusion that the planet is in imminent danger.

Many of the 400 scientists have taken part in the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose climate change reports tout consensus but which critics charge are heavily edited to support pre-defined conclusions.

Among the IPCC's warming "deniers" is atmospheric scientist Hendrik Tennekes, former research director at the Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute.

"I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting -- a six-meter sea level rise, 15 times the IPCC number -- entirely without merit," he said. "I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: Just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached."

Physicist John W. Brosnahan, who develops remote-sensing tools for clients like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, says: "Of course I believe in global warming, and in global cooling -- all part of the natural climate changes that the Earth has experienced for billions of years, caused primarily by cyclical variations in solar output."

Brosnahan says he has "not seen any sort of definitive, scientific link to man-made carbon dioxide as the root cause of global warming, only incomplete computer models that suggest that this might be the case." Those models, he says, leave out too many variables.

Indeed, a study in the Royal Meteorological Society's International Journal of Climatology looked at 22 computer models used by the IPCC. Most of the models couldn't even predict the past.

Predictably, after a quick review of the report, Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider said 25 to 30 of the scientists may have received funding from Exxon Mobil (NYSE:XOM), though she didn't name which scientists she thinks were bribed to distort the truth. Wise move.

This is not like Al Gore getting 75 hours of free airtime on NBC, a unit of General Electric (NYSE:GE) , which stands to make wads of cash on things like solar panels and wind turbines. Or Gore being involved with a company that sells carbon offsets.

Heartland Institute senior fellow James Taylor has noted that more than 600 scientists at the Bali gathering could have debunked Gore's warming theories, but the U.N. "censored" them.

By the way, Gore and his statist friends in Europe repeatedly have criticized the U.S. for its "failure to act" on warming. But new data show the U.S. in 2006 slashed output of greenhouse gases by 1.3%, while Europe's output continued to grow. So who's failing to act?

Here an idea: How about NBC hosting 75 hours of debate between some of Inhofe's 400 scientists and any one of Gore's choosing, including himself? Afraid of some inconvenient truths, Al?

Via CNN

Also at Also at A Tangled Web

'Global warming' and you

Price hikes for German beer as costs rise
Nuremberg - A worldwide scarcity of malt and hops means price rises are on the way for German beer, both in Germany and in its principal export market, Italy, a national breweries leader warned Tuesday.

In all, about 15 per cent of German-brewed beer is drunk abroad, with export growth partly making up for declining sales in Germany.

Gerhard Ilgenfritz, president of the private brewer's federation, said the brewery-gate price of a 24-bottle crate was likely to rise 1.00 to 1.10 euros (1.46 to 1.60 dollars) at the start of 2008.

Speaking in the southern city of Nuremberg just before the November 14-16 beer trade fair Beviale, he said the world price of aromatic hops had doubled in the past two years and the price of brewers' barley had tripled.

World barley reserves had been run right down as world demand for grain soared, harvests contracted and pressure grew on farmers to grow for energy sales rather than food.

But the Religion of Environmentalism demands that we go green, starting with increased ethanol production.

Energy was also costing more.

China has become the world's biggest brewer, making 35.1 billion litres annually, followed by the United States (23.2 billion) and Germany (10.7 billion).

First-nine-month domestic sales of 8 billion litres were down 2.3 per cent, whereas exports of German beer gained by 5.2 per cent.

Via Expatica

'Global warming'.

Get it?

UPDATE: Also at Protein Wisdom and Ft. Hard Knox

He's Played On Their Fears!

Once again, al-Gore is cashing in on the fears of the Leftisphere; fears that he has carefully crafted over the years.

Gore Joins Major Venture Capital Firm
Al Gore announced Monday he's joining Silicon Valley's most prestigious venture capital firm to guide investments that help combat global warming.

Gore, who won the Nobel Peace Prize last month for his work on climate change, joins Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers as it and dozens of other venture firms expand into so-called "clean-tech" investments worldwide.

The former vice president, who starred in the Academy Award-winning global warming documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," is expected to be a high-profile, active partner at Kleiner Perkins. He's already a senior adviser to Google Inc. (GOOG) and a member of the board at Apple Inc. (AAPL) Alliance for Climate Protection, the advocacy group he co-founded, is based in Palo Alto.

Gore said he'll donate 100 percent of his salary as a Kleiner Perkins partner to the advocacy group, which focuses on accelerating policy solutions to the climate crisis. He would not disclose the amount. "It's one of the benefits of not being in the public sector anymore," he said in an interview.

Accelerating policy solutions is also known as propaganda. And what about his profits from carbon credits?

Also Monday, Kleiner Perkins partner John Doerr announced he's joining the advisory board of Generation Investment Management, the $1 billion investment firm that Gore founded with David Blood, who previously managed $325 billion in assets out of Goldman Sachs' London office. Doerr is one of Silicon Valley's most outspoken clean-tech advocates.

Clean technology encompasses alternative fuels, water purification, renewable energy and recycling programs and other eco-friendly initiatives, as well as products ranging from electric cars to microbes that search for oil in seemingly tapped-out wells.

North American and European venture capitalists invested $1.9 billion in clean-tech companies in the first half of 2007, a 10 percent increase from the first half 2006, according to Ann Arbor, Mich.-based trade group Cleantech Network.

Last year, Menlo Park-based Kleiner Perkins earmarked $100 million of its $600 million investment fund to startups that work on reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The firm expects to dedicate one-third of new funding to clean tech by 2009.

In 2005, Kleiner Perkins named former Secretary of State Colin Powell a "strategic limited partner," but the moderate Republican hasn't played a prominent role in the firm's affairs.

For years, Gore, 59, has been good friends with Doerr, a former Intel Corp. (INTC) salesman who became a billionaire thanks to early investments in startups such as Netscape Communications, Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN) and Google.

They palled around together so much in the 1990s that fellow venture capitalist and former InfoWorld editor Stewart Alsop II created spoof political buttons that said "Gore and Doerr in 2004."

Via The AP

Interesting timing. Very interesting.

Spokesthingys from the Propaganda Ministry of the People's Revolutionary Republic of Koslamistan were unavailable for comment. Perhaps it's the new reality - al-Gore the eeeevil capitalist - that's caused their tofu to spoil.

Will The Nobel Go To A Heroine Or Huckster?

Irena Sendler is 97-years young.

During World War Two, she risked her life in an heroic effort to save Jewish kids from the German death factories. "She is the last surviving person from the group she worked with that ran an underground network to save these children ...."

On October 12, 2007, will the Nobel Committee honor a true heroine?

Or, will they play politics join the 'global warming' alarmists and honor al-Gore - the leader of the cult - his motives notwithstanding?

We report. You decide.

Irena Sendler for Nobel Peace Prize

Irena Sendler is a Polish heroine who risked her life to save lives of Jewish children from Gestapo and Nazi death camps during World War II.

In German-occupied Poland, a Pole assisting Jews would get a death sentence.

Irena worked as senior administrator in the Warsaw Social Welfare Department that ran the canteens of the city, when Germany invaded the country in 1939. The canteens not only provided food, financial aid and other services for orphans, elderly, and poor but also clothing, medicine and money for Jewish families. To avoid inspections, they were registered under fictitious Catholic names and they were reported as patients suffering highly contagious diseases such as typhus or tuberculosis.

In 1942, with the designation of a closed area to herd Jews, known as the Warsaw Ghetto, the Jewish families could only wait for a certain death. In October 1942, when the Council for Aid to Jews - codename Zegota - was organized by the Polish Underground, Sendler was one of its first recruits.

Irena managed to get a pass from the Warsaw Epidemic Control Department to be able to enter the ghetto legally. She and her co-conspirator, Irena Schultz, visited ghetto daily with the aim of reestablishing contacts, bringing food, medicines and clothes. However, given the terrible conditions in the Ghetto, where 5,000 people were dying a month from starvation and disease, the two decided to help people, particularly children, to get out of the Ghetto.

Persuading parents to separate from their children was a horrible task for Irena, a young mother herself. Finding families on the Christian - so called Aryan side - willing to shelter the children, and thereby willing to risk being executed if the Germans ever found out, was also not easy.

She started to smuggle children in an ambulance as victims of typhus, but also in gunnysacks, garbage cans, toolboxes, loads of goods, potato sacks, coffins. Other methods included a church with two entrances, one opened into the ghetto and the other opened into the Aryan side of Warsaw. Children entered the Church Jews and exited as Christians. Irena could recruit at least one person from each of the ten Centers of the Social Welfare Department. With their help, she issued hundreds of false documents with forged signatures, giving the Jewish children temporary identities.

It was easier to escape the ghetto than to survive the Aryan side. The rescue of a child required help of at least ten people.

As a rule, the children were first placed in a temporary shelter, then to a foster home after they had somewhat recovered from their period of destitution. There was also a need to wait for them to receive from the Polish Underground false identity papers that were good enough to pass German muster. Each child had to be provided with a factitious birth and baptismal certificate and a family history of parents, siblings, aunts and uncles, etc. which the children, if old enough, had to commit to memory. "I sent most of the children to religious establishments," she recalled. "I knew that I could count on the Sisters." Irena kept record, in coded form, of the children and their true identities.

The only record of their true identities was kept in jars buried beneath an apple tree in the neighbor’s back yard, across the street from the German barracks. She hoped she could someday locate the children and inform them of their past.

In all, the jars contained the names of 2,500 children...

On October 20, 1943 Sendler was arrested by the Gestapo. Although subjected to beatings and torture during which both of her feet and legs were broken, but not her spirit: she revealed nothing. Never again would she be able to walk without crutches. Irena spent three months in the Pawiak prison where she was sentenced to death.

She was rescued by Zegota which, fearful that she would break down and reveal the location of the children, managed to bribe a guard to check off her name on a list of those already executed. As a result, she was listed on public bulletin boards as among those on whom a sentence of death had been carried out.

Rescued, she had to assume a completely new identity and live an entirely new life. She could not visit her dying mother, nor attend her funeral. But she did again become deeply involved in the work of Zegota.

At the end of the war, Irena dug up the jars and used the notes to find the 2.500 children she had given to adoptive families. She reunited them with their relatives scattered across Europe, but most of them had lost their families in Nazi concentration camps.

After the war she worked for Social Welfare; she helped create houses for elderly people, orphanages and an emergency service for children.

In 1965 the Yad Vashem organization in Jerusalem awarded her with the title Righteous Among the Nations and in 1991 she was made an honorary citizen of Israel.

"If Sendler actually wins, this will be the first time a Nobel prize would have been awarded in connection to the Holocaust." (haaretz.com)

Via Polonia News

Also at abcnews.com