Tuesday, August 31, 2010

The Long Form Census

I think everyone has had a chance to air their opinions on the Long Form Census.  All the experts have come around with their arguments about how useful a census is.  I agree with them.  Information is very useful.  Data needs to be collected and analysed to inform the best possible decisions.

The argument has not been made by any politician, bureaucrat or stuffy professor as to why I should be forced to provide this data.  They assume, without providing any information of their own, that compulsory data is going to be more true than voluntary data.

This is the heart of the dispute.  The Census is not going away.  Its only going to be friendlier.  I am much more apt to do my civic duty and answer the questions truthfully if I'm not commanded to do so.  Most people including myself will simply give whatever information will keep us out of trouble.  This doesn't make it true information.
This was my experience with the census.  When asked about my religion, I couldn't respond "blow it out your ass."  Instead I wrote "Jedi."  Am I really a Jedi, at least in faith?  I won't incriminate myself.  

How do they know that issuing threats makes better data?  Threats corrupt data in one way and voluntary data may be corrupt in other ways.  Why not choose the more benign method?  Did these professional bean counters get pushed around in elementary?  I don't get it.  Half the art of marketing is collecting voluntary data.  So much of the research and studies we hear about is based on voluntary data.  I do believe there is quite a large body of knowledge surrounding the uses and methods of analyzing voluntary data.  My personal freedom is worth the expense of a larger sample size and different techniques.

How about we put this into perspective.  Look at the Highway Traffic Act.  Its not about useful information, its about public safety.  Its vigorously enforced and applies to anyone operating a vehicle.  Speed limits are clearly posted on nearly all roads but everyone still speeds.  Even Judges speed.  Even the finger waging Chiefs of Police break the speed limit.  The threat of fines or imprisonment added to the real threat of death  due to speeding doesn't make anyone stop speeding.  Think about that.  How useful could fines or prison possibly be to getting better data?  Not very useful at all.

I read one justification for this bureaucratic bullying to be that poor people don't answer truthfully to voluntary census forms.  If those poor people don't want their privacy violated, then we should take what little money they have or even throw them in jail.  That's the progressive mind at work.  Liberals in the thrall of progressives seem to have been so successful at promoting freedom previously that they now have nothing better to do than return us to tyranny one little law at a time.

I am a proud and free Citizen of this country.  It is my civic duty to voluntarily provide accurate data to Statistics Canada.  Until the Long Form Census becomes voluntary I hereby vow to skew and corrupt all census data that is compelled with threats of fines or prison.  I hope you take this vow with me and I understand if you don't do so publicly.  Your rights are yours alone.  Others may have the power to take them away but they are yours to claim always and forever.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Skeptic Victory: Cameron Wimps Out of his own CAGW Debate

Name any competition you like.  If you don't show up, YOU LOSE.  James Cameron lost his first debate on Global Warming.  It was spectacular display of cowardice and vitriol.

The debate was put forward by Cameron himself with all the bravado of a western gunslinger.  He said he wanted to "call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads."

We were there at high noon.  You think trash talk like that is going scare a skeptic?  We've heard worse from better people and still win.   

Ann McElhinney, Marc Morano, and Andrew Breitbart took up the challenge.  They were contacted by Cameron's people and invited to debate at AREDAY.  AREDAY was an environmental conference that would give Cameron the home field advantage and the crowd.  Then things start to get fishy.  Cameron starts changing the rules until the debate becomes a no public, no cameras round table where even audio recordings became a bone of contention.  So much for high noon. 

I believe Cameron was trying to force his opponents to quit and storm off in a huff.  It didn't work.  Skeptics performed admirably and graciously, conceding to all of Camerons unreasonable changes until he was finally forced to run away like a big wuss.  That same day, sore loser Cameron petulantly called skeptics "swine."    

This is the character of you're average warmist.  They talk a big game, playing it up like they're Mohamed Ali going into the big fight.  What do we get instead?  He runs and hides like the biggest wussy on the planet calling us swine over a cowardly shoulder.  

How often do we hear that money is not the measure of a man?  James Cameron measures up like a loser, a coward and a wuss.  (this is me being nice)

What benefit could running away from your own event have for Cameron?  Someone advised him not to do this presumably for some tactical advantage.  He obviously wants to scrap but then doesn't.  He forfeited  giving us victory but if he wants to run lets indulge him some more and give chase.  There's some weakness here that we must perceive and exploit.

What could force Cameron to run?  He thought it was a good idea and then changed his mind.  Could he become the next Al Gore?  Would people have seen him spitting and frothing and known the true face of James Cameron?  David Suzuki has his hate face on youtube and there is no amount of PR the Suzuki Foundation can apply to counter it.   The King of the World doesn't want his crown tarnished.

It's his crown and kingdom that he truly values.  Like all hypocritical leftards he puts his wealth and stature above his trendy causes.  This is why he ran away, leaving his cause to look pathetically cultish, intolerant, and threatened.  

Go for the crown and we draw him into battle.  This is war after all.  Cameron has declared war on the human race.  A self-declared enemy deserves no quarter and no comfort.  Its an irony that anarchists, socialists, and haters of the free market and law have created tools that directly diminish Camerons wealth.  The people inclined to willingly consume Camerons product are also the people most likely to steal it.  

We must simply not consume any Cameron product.  If you must consume it for academic reasons, borrow it from a friend or from the public library.  As Cameron, King of the Avatards, ages the bitterness and vitriol are sure to increase.  Enjoy these outbursts.  It means we are winning.   

Monday, August 23, 2010

International Black Ribbon Day

Did you know that today is Black Ribbon Day?  Last year our Parliament voted unanimously to commemorate this day to the memories of the millions that died under Communism and National Socialism. 

August 23rd was picked specifically as the anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.  The most evil governments in history decided to officially cooperate with the signing of this pact.  They then proceeded to invade Poland and Finland together.  They both proceeded to invade other countries until finally the Nazis decided to invade the Soviet Union. 

When both of these vile Governments ceased to exist tens of millions of innocent people were dead and millions more had died to stop them. 

Remember the pact between these evil states and the harm their ideology caused.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

How freinds of the CBC describe the CBC

John Doyle is a friend of the CBC.  Its reasonable to assume that he is well acquainted with CBC having written many articles about them for The Globe and Mail.  His insights into that liberal organ this morning were both enlightening and amusing.

Here's some of the best parts:

"The CBC is a bizarre institution, a rats’ nest of ego, bickering, backstabbing, rumour and sour dislike of anyone who either has power inside CBC, or anyone or anything that isn’t part of the CBC. It’s a wonder they ever get around to producing any shows."
and then while talking about some guy who left:
"- he took charge because he was exactly what the place needed – someone strong-willed enough to be dismissive of the CBC’s lazy internal culture."
Lefties love their strong willed dismissive elites.  CBC needs some more of that.  Hahah!

What about The National?

"Months after a makeover, The National is still a farce. The awkward-looking scenario of stand-up anchors, inelegant poses and reporters speaking from giant screens makes the program look like some terrible, cheapo sci-fi movie. The fleeting news “bits” about trivial stories are the very definition of dumbed-down, and even the weather reports delivered by Claire Martin are so irrelevant they have the air of absurdist mini-dramas. Worse, the makeover has not given The National the ratings boost that was hoped."
 I kind of like The National.  I know its weird, but its also the best the CBC can do.  When I want to know what lefties are thinking I'll stream The National

These are the problems with the CBC according to Doyle:
"The key ingredient of provocative, challenging television has gone missing. The core problem for CBC in dealing with both its loyal audience and its enemies is that it has to justify its existence to two very different camps. On the one hand, airing ratings hits makes CBC a player in Canadian broadcasting, accumulating ad dollars and viewers. On the other hand, those who expect a public broadcaster to provide what commercial TV cannot are asking, where’s the beef?"
The problem with the CBC are folks like Doyle.  When lefties say "provocative challenging television," what they mean is: smash conservative ideas to smithereens.   Nobody has to watch, they just have to do it.  There's an important mission for a state broadcaster that shouldn't have to bow to pithy concepts like revenue or profit. 

This is all just a right wing propaganda to them.
"Meanwhile, CBC News has been spooked by constant assaults on its integrity by the forces of the right in Canada. The Conservative Party and its allies have done what the minority Conservative government can now avoid doing directly – isolating CBC News as a lefty organization out of touch with Canadians. It’s been deftly done, and CBC has reacted to the point of often appearing embarrassingly eager to over-accommodate right-wing views."
That's rich, but also telling.  The CBC is incapable of improving or adapting along with the country.  They are stuck in Trudeau era Canada and can't get out.  The county has changed under their noses but refuse to accept there is even a bias problem.

I don't remember the CBC ever " appearing embarrassingly eager to over-accommodate right-wing views."  Correct me if I'm wrong please. 

The CBC should get out of politics altogether.  Government institutions like the police, the military or even Canada Post, take taxes from everyone and provide a service to everyone.  How could I support an institution that promotes its own narrow interests at the expense of everyone?  Doyle asks "wheres the beef," but wants everyone to eat it well-done.  Give me blue-rare dammit.  Give me raw facts and let me do the cooking.

The lefty mind believes that  the CPC should be smithereens by now.  The continuing government of Stephen Harper's Conservatives could only mean that the CBC isn't doing its job.  I contend the opposite.  A string of poor leaders and no policy except economic self-flagellation should sink any party.  The surprising resilience of the LPC is due in no small part to the life support given to it by the MSM in general and the CBC in particular. 

People hate spin.  They aren't stupid.  The sooner the CBC stops trying to teach the poor dummies how to think the sooner their troubles will be behind them.

Monday, August 9, 2010

Eco-minded Bus drivers tone down the Oil Sands Rhetoric

Its my pleasure to report that the bus drivers at the Coumbia Icefields are no longer lying and exagerating about the Oil Sands.

I'm told that the bus drivers now tell each and every visitor that the Oil Sands consumes between 2 and 3 barrels of water per barrel of oil.  Its a far cry from the 10 barrels they claimed to me only a year ago.  I wonder how much water one of those bus drivers consumes per barrel of oil produced? They produce negative barrels remember. I don't know the exact numbers but I bet they have a much much less efficient water to oil ratio than the Oil Sands could ever have.

My information is second hand. I was busy destroying the earth (and so were you mwahahhahaha!). My girl and her cousins went without me. They destroy the earth in their spare time. (I'm kiddng girls!)

It might surprise you that I consider myself an environmentalist. To me that means I must simply leave things better than I found them. As liberals have left the idea of liberty so too has the green religion lost itself.

What perplexes me is the activist role that this particular operation on the Glacier is so keen on.  Why talk about Fort McMurry at all?  There you are in a jewel of the Rockies talking about oil production as your giant bus chuggs away like a dump truck in a strip mine.  Does any one else see the humour in this?  The attempted boycott of Alberta Tourism is knee slapping irony.  These Eco-nuts don't just bite the hand that feeds them, they bite the mouth that bites!  Its mass hysteria. 

I took a tour of some priceless Centosuar bonebeds in the Alberta Badlands a few weeks ago.  Funny that we didn't talk about the Oil Sands at all.  We talked about Geology, Natural History, even Natural Climate Changes that led to the melting of the ice age glaciers.  When I take a tour this is what I want to know.  I don't want to hear about politics.  I'll tour the parliment buildings when I want politics. 

They also ask the tour goers at the Athabasca Glacier if they beleive in Global Warming. This is great.  Some brave people actually spoke up and declared themselves apostates, unbelievers, heretics, deniers, and skeptics.  I call them Heroes.

You could argue that Climate Change has a big impact on Glaciers.  One can expect every glacier that ever existed to be either in a state of growth or contraction.  Ask an honest scientist how common it is for the accumulation compaction and melting of a Glacier to be in perfect static equalibrium.  They grow or they contract.  Thats pretty much it.  All of it independantly of CO2 as well.

Not only is thre undeniable proof that CO2 levels were in excess of 10 times the current level but these occured during ice age periods of overgrown glaciers.  In fact earths history is mostly hot.  Many Ice ages and warm periods have come and gone all by themselves, but the earth seems to have a bias towards warmer temperatures.  Compared to the earths history this is an ice age!

So the next time you find yourself listening to activist bus drivers on an Icefield just turn your back to the glacier and look down the valley.  You'll see great mounds of till called Morains.  They tell you that the Glacier has been shrinking more than it grows for a long long time.  The glaciers have been shrinking since before Pharohs built the pyrimids. 

I didn't discover this and I didn't just read about it.  Most poeple have read it but can't put it all together.  I'm lucky in that I've crossed paths with many Geologists, real earth scientsts, who've told me all about Glaciers and ice ages and Natural Climate Change.