Quick Bites: SDM Wants a New Roof, Too
Give the Dolphins a New Roof?
The newest public boondoggle to darken the door of county taxpayers comes in the form of a demand/threat from the Miami Dolphins. The gist is that unless the Dolphins get a new roof on their privately-owned stadium, the community will not get to host Super Bowls and other events, which will cost us tax revenue and lost business.
SDM Says: Like the Dolphins, SDM’s house is privately-owned and the taxpayers will not benefit from increased property taxes unless SDM’s abode is improved by a new roof. Also, no local roofers will benefit from SDM’s roofing job, unless county taxpayers foot the bill. So pay for my roof and help the community!
SDM Wonders: How dumb do the Dolphins think the County Commission is? Answer: Just dumb enough.
Don’t Make Our Children Pay
In another example of a politician speaking without grasping the irony of his words, President Obama in his inaugural address’s mention of climate change said that we “would betray our children and future generations” unless we reduce green house gases.
Of course, Mr. Obama feels no such compunction when he proposes and permits budget deficits that increase the public debt of this country by record amounts.
SDM Wonders: Who is it that is really betraying our children and future generations?
Will Scotty’s Landing be Saved After All?
A Miami Herald article yesterday noted that the City of Miami had revised the procurement for the lease on the property occupied by Scotty’s Landing. Apparently, the commission removed a requirement that bidders not owe property taxes as a precondition to bidding.
SDM is no fan of “end justify the means” procurement but the very idea that some chain restaurant would substitute for the quirky Scotty’s Landing makes this particular piece of municipal chicanery tickle SDM’s funny bone. Just imagine all those high-end lobbyists who thought they had eliminated Scotty’s from the picture waking up to find out that they had been hoisted on their own intriguing petards!
SDM Says: Ha! :)
Space Scientists: Anthropogenic Global Warming is Not Settled Science
Check out this new report by a bunch of retired NASA space scientists that confirms SDM’s contention that “global warming” may be the biggest environmental false alarm in history. Following is a summary of their findings:
1. The science that predicts the extent of Anthropogenic Global Warming is not settled science.
2. There is no convincing physical evidence of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming. Most of the alarm regarding AGW results from output of unvalidated computer models. We understand scientific arguments regarding how doubling CO2 in the atmosphere over a hundred years or more (if possible) can have a small direct warming effect, but we question the accuracy of feedback simulations in current models computing climate system responses that amplify CO2 effects. Efforts to estimate climate sensitivity to CO2 based solely on physical data have large uncertainties because many factors affect global temperatures, and CO2 levels rise in the atmosphere after the earth warms due to other factors. While paleoclimate data clearly show CO2 levels rise and fall in the atmosphere hundreds of years after temperature rises and falls due to other causes, the evidence is very weak to support claims of a catastrophic rise in global temperatures caused by CO2 emissions related to human activity.
3. Computer models need to be validated before being used in critical decision-making. Our manned aerospace backgrounds in dealing with models of complex phenomena have convinced us that this rule must be followed to avoid decisions with serious unintended consequences.
4. Because there is no immediate threat of global warming requiring swift corrective action, we have time to study global climate changes and improve our prediction accuracy. While there are many benefits due to some global warming, the major threats appear to be associated with a net loss of Greenland and Antarctica ice sheet mass that would contribute to a gradual sea-level rise. The history, current trends, and specific causes of ice sheet melting and ice accumulation by precipitation must be better understood before determining how best to respond to threats of accelerated sea-level rise.
5. Our US government is over-reacting to concerns about Anthropogenic Global Warming. More CO2 in the atmosphere would be beneficial for forest and crop growth to support the earth’s growing population, so control of CO2 emissions is not an obvious best solution to hyped-up concerns regarding AGW. Eventually the earth will run out of fossil fuels and alternative energy sources will be required. Market forces will (and should) play a big role in this transition to alternative energy sources. Government funding of promising research and development objectives for alternative fuels appears to be a better option at this time than expenditures of enormous resources to limit CO2 emissions.
6. A wider range of solution options should be studied for global warming or cooling threats from any credible cause. CO2 effectiveness in controlling global average temperatures or sea levels has not been established. More reliable and greater control authority may be available from engineering solutions that would accommodate the beneficial aspects of more CO2 in the atmosphere.