What I did on my summer vacation – another climatologist’s perspective

We should celebrate fossil fuels, not condemn them

David R. Legates

I recently read an article in which statistician, “hockey stick” manufacturer and self-proclaimed climatologist Michael Mann discussed his summer vacation. Reporting on his travels to Montana, Dr. Mann laments the fact that glaciers in Glacier National Park are receding. He blames this on human-caused climate change. He says he tried to get away from work but just couldn’t, because the “spectre of climate change stares you in the face as you tour the park.”

I likewise did my level best to get away from life, but was no more successful. You see, I’m a not just a climatologist. I am also a human being, and am acutely aware of the life-long struggle for survival experienced by billions of destitute, desperate people on our planet – and of the innovative, determined human spirit that stares you in the face as you peruse the daily news and tour our nation’s museums.

Dr. Mann was viewing glaciers that have actually been receding since the end of the Little Ice Age, back around 1860. He got upset because he thinks (and wants us to believe) that they have been losing ice only since 1975 or so – and it’s our fault, because carbon dioxide emissions from our cars, factories, electricity generating plants, home heating units and other sources are causing “unprecedented” global warming.

I instead visited three museums that are within a one-hour drive from my home: the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania in Strasbourg, PA, the Air Mobility Command Museum at Dover Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware, and the Chesapeake-Delaware Canal Museum in Chesapeake City, Maryland.

What I saw underscored how far we Americans have come since the Civil War and Industrial Revolution, in large part because of fossil fuel-driven technology – and how far billions of less fortunate people worldwide still have to go, to achieve a standard of living, health and welfare close to what we enjoy. Unfortunately, and unforgivably, they are being held back by policies that elevate misplaced concern about hydrocarbon energy and “dangerous manmade climate change” above the needs of people.

At the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania you see the impacts the railway had on building this great nation. From simple steam engines that could carry just two people, to huge steam locomotives that connected our country's two far-flung shores, to the diesel and electric locomotives that built the industrial backbone of this country, the ingenuity of the last 150-plus years sits quietly on display as an historical reminder of our legacy.

The Air Mobility Command Museum is a testimony not just to aviation, but to air cargo transportation. The amazing machines, and the intrepid men and women who flew them, helped us move equipment and supplies to support troops, provide assistance in areas ravaged by natural disasters or human catastrophes, and keep freedom alive in places like West Berlin during the 1948-49 airlift.

They also stand as marvelous monuments to human innovation – and a testament to our ability and determination to support freedom and democracy, and lend assistance when needed to the plight of those less fortunate, even when located in the far reaches of our planet.

Connecting two important waterways, the Chesapeake-Delaware Canal is truly a miracle of human entrepreneurship. Originally dug by hand, the fourteen-mile-long canal connects the Chesapeake and Delaware Bays, reducing the shipping distance from Baltimore to Philadelphia by nearly 300 miles.

Eventually, the canal was deepened and its locks removed, to allow goods to be shipped directly by ocean-going vessels without having to offload them to a turnpike, or later the railway. This greatly increased the region’s economic viability and encouraged development of the mid-Atlantic area.

But as I looked these monuments, I did so with sadness. This ingenuity was brought about by forward-looking men and women who used their energies to develop machines and enhance their efficiency, with the ultimate goal of helping humankind.

Today, however, there are those who see this effort as wrong and (dare I say it?) even evil. They want to restrict energy and its availability, and thereby limit our ingenuity, innovation and progress by draining the very lifeblood that made these earlier developments possible. Without coal and oil, there would have been no railroads and no cargo transportation, either by air or by sea.

Democracy would likely have been but a distant memory in most of Europe and Southeast Asia – or maybe not even a memory at all. The United States would not have developed as it did, and it certainly would not be the world's leader in innovative thinking that it is today. It is quite likely that we would not be far removed from the conditions in which Africa currently finds itself.

These three museums only offer a small glimpse at the myriad of marvels produced by human ingenuity, and the role that hydrocarbon energy has played in them since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. The development of inexpensive energy led to phenomenal, previously unheard of increases in industrial output and worker efficiency, in wages and free time, in living standards and human health and welfare.

They also provided us with the weekend and vacation time, and the physical wherewithal, to experience the wonders of God’s creation -- as well as the ability to attend to environmental stewardship.

It is all these opportunities that people in undeveloped and under-developed countries wish to emulate. But for that to happen, we must help keep the cost of energy low and shun policies and practices that make it expensive and unreliable. If we make energy so expensive that only the rich can afford it, the poor and the vulnerable will be denied access, and will be condemned to nasty, brutal and short lives marked by squalor, deprivation, starvation and disease.

I find it immoral to suggest that the abject poverty, disease and malnutrition that still afflict much of the world must be ignored, while we concern ourselves with “saving the planet from global warming.”

Are national park glaciers – whose existence and demise are affected primarily by the same natural forces that repeatedly spawned and melted mile-high, continent-wide Pleistocene ice fields – more important than the more unfortunate inhabitants of our planet? Assuming, of course, that by addressing greenhouse gas emissions we can positively alter the planet’s climate, or that we can know what climate is optimal.

It is ironic that it is our affluence – created by our technological innovations and use of hydrocarbons – which has allowed us to become environmentally conscious. When people are in dire need of food, clothing, shelter and other basic necessities of life, they cannot be concerned with environmental issues. To cite just one example of thousands, because the people of India and Bangladesh are so poor, the Ganges River serves as both their source of drinking water and their cesspool for untreated sewage. Their poverty prevents them from focusing on even the most basic environmental concerns.

Moreover, freedom and energy availability go hand-in-hand. Oppression thrives when subjects are kept poor and deprived of technological advancements. When people have the time and ability to travel and communicate, to be innovative, and to organize to produce a better way of life or fight a common enemy – freedom grows. Inexpensive energy is the key to ending both poverty and oppression.

More than two million people will visit Glacier National Park this year, to marvel at nature. I wonder how they would have gotten there ... or whether they would have had the time to do so … if it were not for the transportation innovations that resulted from hydrocarbon fuels.

I would encourage them to visit these museums – or museums like them – to see what humans have built, and ponder what our future will likely be if backward-thinking policies cause their legacy to vanish. May they marvel at the wonders of nature, and perhaps lament the loss of glaciers. But may they also lament the loss of life caused by too little use of fossil fuels, not by too much of such life-enhancing fuels.

David R. Legates, PhD, CCM, is a Professor of Climatology at the University of Delaware in Newark, Delaware, USA.

From Benny Peiser's Global Warming Policy Foundation

UN Warning: Most Nations Have Failed To Ratify Kyoto Protocol Extension

 

Britain Handed EU Climate And Energy Portfolio

 In Draft Juncker Commission Line-Up

The UN has expressed concern that only a handful of countries have ratified an extension to the Kyoto Protocol, more than 18 months after they agreed to do so. Kyoto, the world’s only legally binding global emissions treaty, ran out at the end of 2012. At climate talks in Doha, December 2012, the 144 parties to the treaty agreed to extend the deal to 2020. However, so far only 11 have formally backed the amendment, despite an intervention by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon in February 2013. Until all 144 parties deliver their “instruments of acceptance” to New York, the amendment will not enter into law. --Ed King, Reporting Climate Change, 4 September 2014

The top leaders of China and India, two of the world’s top emitters of greenhouse gases, aren’t planning to attend this month’s United Nations summit on climate change, according to a diplomat at the UN. President Xi Jinping of China and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have told UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon they won’t be at the day-long meeting of world leaders on Sept. 23, the person said, requesting not to be identified discussing the leaders’ plans. That deals a blow to a gathering meant to lay the groundwork for a global agreement to reduce carbon dioxide, which is blamed for global warming. --Sangwon Yoon and Mark Drajem, Bloomberg, 3 September 2014

 

The UK could miss out on its desired economics portfolio in Jean-Claude’s Juncker’s new European Commission, instead being handed responsibility for the EU’s energy and climate change policies. Juncker will rebuff Prime Minster David Cameron, who has lobbied hard for Jonathan Hill to be given an economics job, according to a draft European Commission line up, seen by EurActiv. The decision, if ultimately confirmed, could push the UK closer to leaving the EU. --EurActiv, 4 September 2014

Since the turn of the century, there has been little increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s surface, new research claims. Previous studies claimed this hiatus has lasted for 15 years, but new research believes the temperature has remained almost constant since 1995. The conclusions were made by an economics professor who studied historical land and ocean temperatures for noticeable trends. Professor Ross McKitrick from the University of Guelph in Canada studied land and ocean temperatures since 1850. He compared this to satellite data from 1979 to 2014. By plotting trends in this data, he has concluded that global warming has been on pause for 19 years. --Victoria Woollaston, Daily Mail, 3 September 2014

Politicians who do not believe in climate change should be ‘crushed and buried’, according to the new president of the British Science Association. Sir Paul Nurse, who starts his presidency next week, pledged to ‘take on’ the ‘serial offenders’ who he accused of cherry picking scientific facts to suit their arguments. In an extraordinary outburst, Sir Paul accused those who refuse to accept scientific orthodoxy on global warming of ‘distorting’ the facts. --Ben Spencer, Daily Mail, 4 September 2014

Dr Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, accused Sir Paul of using ‘the language of extremism’. ‘If he can’t live with critics and sceptics that is too bad. But there is no need to use this kind of violent and aggressive vocabulary. ‘Scepticism used to be a sign of science itself. When scientists cannot cope with that, and instead use this language of extremism, it is a sign of desperation, a sign they are losing the plot.’ --Ben Spencer, Daily Mail, 4 September 2014

Sir Paul Nurse is calling for malefactors to be "crushed and buried", which sounds as though he has been reading too much of the Marxist literature he apparently favoured at one time, or perhaps indicating too many hours spent in front of Game of Thrones. We know who he means of course, because he has made such allegations against Nigel Lawson in the past. On that occasion, Nurse got himself into a bit of a pickle, unable to defend himself from Lawson's accusation that he was lying. Eighteen months later, he is reduced to repeating the general allegation, still without any specific details of the offence, but this time minus the name as well. You have to laugh. --Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, 4 September 2014

With many advanced economies questioning whether they can afford low-carbon policies and investments in renewable energy, emerging markets account for a growing share of global investment in ‘green’ energy. Yet fiscal pressures are raising doubts in these countries, too, jeopardising the global green growth transition. In this climate, it is no surprise that large-scale private investment in ‘green’ sectors has yet to materialise due to perceived risks and the relative novelty of the market. That is unlikely to change until governments create the enabling conditions needed for business to drive forward the next generation of green growth. --Oxford Analytica Conference 2014, Christ Church, Oxford University, 18 September 2014

The Road of Good Intentions and the Vested Interest in Race Consciousness

Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed

Encounter Books, New York, 2014

HB, 205 pages, US$23.99

ISBN: 978-1-59403-725-2
 

 

Reviewed by Mary Grabar on September 4, 2014. 

 

This originally appeared on the Selous Foundation For Public Policy Research website. 

Jason Riley illustrates that old adage about the pavement on the road to hell in a reportorial account that reads with the ease of a memoir. This book is something of a compact sequel to many by Thomas Sowell and Shelby Steele who have busted destructive liberal myths about race. In six succinct chapters Riley deals with the issues of politics, culture, crime, labor, education, and affirmative action. He uses personal anecdotes and research to show how liberal policies have harmed instead of helped blacks.

Unlike Thomas Sowell and Shelby Steele, to whom the book is dedicated, Riley had the benefits of growing up after implementation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Wrong-headed court rulings, legislation, and the encouragement of destructive behavior, however, nullified the benefits that should have accrued for the black community.

Griggs v. Duke Power in 1971 on the “disparate impact” from the employer’s requirement of a high-school diploma and minimal IQ scores is one such ruling. It replaced equal opportunity with equal results, thus fundamentally taking away the incentives needed for long-term success.

Riley knows from firsthand experience what such misguided policies do. He grew up in Buffalo in the 1980s. His parents, although divorced, stayed involved (especially important in the case of his father) and moved from a black inner-city neighborhood to a largely white suburb. Unfortunately, Riley’s two sisters and best friend succumbed to the culture that is increasingly more difficult to escape. He did not and went on to join the Wall Street Journal, where he now sits on the editorial board.

The influence of Thomas Sowell’s clear-headed approach is evident in each of the book’s chapters. In the first one, “Black Man in the White House,” Riley illustrates how political power among black and other ethnic groups (namely, the Irish) has not translated directly into well-being for the group. Between 1940 and 1960 the black poverty rate fell from 87 percent to 47 percent, but between 1972 and 2011 it declined only from 32 percent to 28 percent and remained three times the white rate. Demands for political racial power have resulted in gerrymandered black districts that have increased polarization and decreased the well-being of most blacks. For example, the racial preference programs in hiring and contracting instituted by successive black mayors in Atlanta have not translated into advantages for average blacks and the black underclass.

In chapter two, “Culture Matters,” Riley relates the pressures placed on him while growing up to not “act white,” e.g., to speak ungrammatically and neglect school work. Added to this is the message of victimization by the NAACP, the National Urban League, and most black politicians. Such messages lead to an achievement gap between black and white students even in affluent suburbs, like Shaker Heights, near Cleveland, Ohio, as John Ogbu, professor of anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley, found in his study, Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement.

The third chapter, “The Enemy Within,” is a devastating critique of black crime, the overwhelming majority of it black-on-black. Riley speaks from the experience of being stopped by police because of looking like a criminal suspect. Sadly, given crime statistics, police go on probability, as do black store owners. Riley connects increasing crime rates–by 139 percent during the 1960s—to the expansion of criminal defendants’ rights: “In the 1950s, when segregation was legal, overt racism was rampant, and black poverty was much higher than today, black crime rates were lower and blacks comprised a smaller percentage of the prison population.” Riley addresses outrageous claims that equate incarceration to slavery and Jim Crow by “celebrated academics,” such as Michelle Alexander, and asks “is it any great shock that black people without advanced degrees have less sympathy for black thugs?”

 In the subsequent chapter, “Mandating Unemployment” Riley connects minimum wage laws to their origins by unions that wanted to exclude black labor and use upward pressure for their own wages. The unemployment rate for young black men began exceeding that of young white men when the minimum wage law was amended to catch up with inflation in 1950. There are more statistics: only 5 percent of hourly workers earn minimum wage, and most are 25 or younger and work part-time. An increase typically benefits not the single mother in the ghetto but the suburban teenager.

In his chapter entitled “Educational Freedom,” Riley lays out how teachers unions act out of self-interest to increase their own numbers, driving up costs of education. They give vast sums to Democratic candidates in exchange for favors. In spite of an increase in federal per-pupil spending by an inflation-adjusted 375 percent between 1970 and 2010, the learning gap between black and white students remains what it was in 1970. Presenting the improved academic performance of some Harlem charter schools as evidence, Riley proposes school choice as a viable solution.

Lastly, the chapter “Affirmative Discriminations” shows how race-based affirmative college admissions harm intended beneficiaries like the black law-school graduates who fail the bar exam at four times the white rate. Riley quips, “Michigan’s law school likes to tout its diversity, but is it doing black students any favors by admitting them with lower standards and setting them up to fail?” Affirmative action harms the reputation of blacks across the board, as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas found out when employers assumed that he had benefited from preferential treatment.

Some of Riley’s observations will be familiar to readers of Thomas Sowell’s excellent work. But Riley marshals the evidence into a compact account, told from the perspective of a younger generation. It’s still not working, is the message. Will liberals listen?

Yes, if they are willing to give up the benefits that such a focus on race grants them. Riley writes that “underprivileged blacks” have become “playthings for liberal intellectuals and politicians who care more about clearing their conscience or winning votes than advocating behaviors and attitudes that have allowed other groups to get ahead.”

 We know what would happen if they did get ahead, if we did become the post-racial society liberals claim to want.

Many academics, pundits, and civil rights leaders would be out of jobs, and the political left would have to find something else to unite around.

---

Mary Grabar, Ph.D., has taught college English for over twenty years. She is the founder of the Dissident Prof Education Project, Inc., an education reform initiative that offers information and resources for students, parents, and citizens. The motto, “Resisting the Re-Education of America,” arose in part from her perspective as a very young immigrant from the former Communist Yugoslavia (Slovenia specifically). She writes extensively and is the editor of EXILED. Ms. Grabar is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis.

Speed Kills Racial Profiling Study

September 4, 2014 by Ann Coulter

In an article about police shootings in last Sunday’s New York Times (8/31), Michael Wines disputes the conventional wisdom about a disproportionate number of African-Americans being shot by police, saying there are no data one way or another. But Wines revives the canard about blacks being disproportionately targeted in traffic stops.

There actually is a study for that.

Throughout the 1990s, the nation was fixated on tales of jack-booted New Jersey state troopers who were stopping speeders on the turnpike just because they were black! In a 2000 primary debate, Vice President Al Gore sneered at then-New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley, saying, “Racial profiling practically began in New Jersey, Senator Bradley.”  Attorney General Eric Holder recently paid tribute to the myth, claiming that when he was in college, he had been stopped “driving from New York to Washington.” He didn’t mention how fast he was going.... Being denounced as virtual Klansmen, the state troopers demanded a real study.  Confident that any new study would merely serve to confirm the troopers’ racism, the DOJ and the New Jersey attorney general commissioned a statistical investigation from the Public Services Research Institute in Maryland........To Read More....

From Benny Peiser's Global Warming Policy Foundation

No Show: World Leaders To Skip UN Climate Summit

 

UN’s Green Agenda A Chaotic Mess, New Report

 

Chinese president Xi Jinping has decided to skip a meeting of world leaders on climate change in New York, according to climate insiders, casting doubt on the summit’s potential to make progress ahead of next year’s major UN climate summit in Paris. The news will be a blow to summit organisers, coming swiftly after the announcement that Indian prime minister Narendra Modi [and German Chancellor Angela Merkel] will also miss the meeting. --Joydeep Gupta, The Guardian, 2 September 2014

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, leader of the world's third-largest greenhouse gas-emitting nation, won't join his U.S. and Chinese counterparts at a United Nations climate summit next month in New York. Modi's absence is a bit of a blow to the summit. --Zack Colman, The Washington Examiner, 14 August 2014

German daily TAZ reports that German Chancellor Angela Merkel isn’t going to bother attending the Ban Ki-Moon initiated climate conference in New York this coming September. The TAZ adds this has been “confirmed by a government spokesman“. Merkel’s decision to snub the event is likely another sign that efforts to forge a climate agreement are already dead in water. The TAZ writes: "Ultimately only Europe and very few other countries remain on board. Canada for example has opted out. Japan and Russia are also no longer taking part.”--Pierre Gosselin, No Tricks Zone 26 May 2014

This month, the United Nations will double down at another climate summit on calls for sweeping and costly global action on a wide array of environmental fronts, as part of a drive for “sustainable development” and a comprehensive new global climate control treaty. But an important U.N. investigative unit is warning that the world organization’s management of environmental programs and treaties is a chaotic mess that has not improved much in years. --George Russell, Fox News, 2 September 2014

Donald Tusk’s nomination as the next Mr. Europe is a major game changer for the European energy and climate policy. And it is not a good one. Stronger activity of the other governments will be needed to balance Poland’s tendency to obstruct European energy and climate targets. Otherwise the 30 August 2014 will be remembered as a dark day for the European renewable energy industry, climate protection and thus the fate of the future generations. --Andrzej Ancygier, EurActiv, 2 September 2014

Emergency measures will be introduced to prevent the lights going out this winter. Offices and factories will be offered compensation to undergo 1970s-style energy rationing and shut down for up to four hours a day to prevent households being plunged into darkness. In addition, owners of old power stations will be asked to switch them back on to meet the country’s demands. National Grid had not planned to use this option until next winter. But yesterday it revealed a series of fires and setbacks had knocked some of the UK’s biggest generators out of service. --Peter Campbell, Daily Mail, 3 September 2014

Throughout the 1970s, Britain was repeatedly shaken to its core by social mayhem and political chaos caused by disastrous energy crises. These traumatic upheavals badly hurt families and UK industries. They also brought down governments and the entire economy. I believe Britain’s ruinous green energy policy is now threatening to bring about a comparable and wholly unnecessary energy crisis. The current set of political leaders are too young or were too sheltered to remember the trauma of the calamities of the 1970s. It is doubtful they realise the enormous political risk their green energy gamble involves. --Benny Peiser, Mail on Sunday, 13 October 2013

Germany’s flagship green energy policy is in tatters, according to a new report by the consultancy firm McKinsey which says many of its goals are “no longer realistic”. “Despite the massive expansion of renewable energies, achieving the key objectives of the energy revolution in Germany by 2020 is no longer realistic” says the report. “If you can’t achieve your own targets, you can hardly be a credible advocate for stricter CO2 cuts in Europe or elsewhere in the world,” said a comment piece in Welt newspaper. --Justin Huggler, The Daily Telegraph, 2 September 2014

While Americans were celebrating the long Labor Day weekend, Russian President Vladimir Putin oversaw the groundbreaking of major pipeline that will carry natural gas from Russia to China. The Power of Siberia pipeline being built by the state-owned energy giant Gazprom could eventually bring $400 billion worth of natural gas to China, which has been trying to meet more of its energy needs with natural gas. But while Putin is pushing for more energy exports, President Obama has not yet made a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, which is seen as a major economic opportunity for the U.S. and Canada. The pipeline has been awaiting approval for more than five years and has been subject to heavy opposition from Democrats and environmentalists who argue the project will contribute to global warming. --Michael Bastasch, The Daily Caller, 2 September 2014

European Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger warned on Tuesday he was not ruling out "worst case scenarios" on Europe's energy security due to Russian President Vladimir Putin's "lies" amid Moscow's actions in Ukraine. "That Putin would use false information, lies and weapons was beyond my imagination," Oettinger said at an event of German energy utility RWE in Brussels. "That's why I am not ruling out worst case scenarios any more," he added. --Reuters, 2 September 2014

The European Union could ban gas exports and limit industrial use as part of emergency measures to protect household energy supplies this winter, a source told Reuters, as it braces for a possible halt in Russian gas as a result of the Ukraine crisis. --Henning Gloystein, --Reuters, 1 September 2014

One More Way to Impose Common Core: the National Association of State Boards of Education

By Mary Grabar, September 3, 2014

At one time socialists and communists sought to inspire a revolution through the schools. They did this by revising the history of the United States to make it appear that our principles would no longer serve in a changing twentieth century. The Soviet Union provided a better model, they claimed, and said so to their charges in the classroom.

Today we are told by business and government leaders that we are now in the twenty-first century, so we must change education.

The radical fringe educators are no longer looking to a socialist state on another continent, but to progressives within, in government departments and large influential corporations and non-profits to produce the new “twenty-first century education.” It’s known as Common Core, and requires all new tests, books, computers, tablets, training sessions, and conferences.

Common Core will make its citizens compliant to the demands of the corporations that now control the government, which in turn grants them special favors. As the federal government controls the state government, it takes away the freedom of parents to direct their children’s education.

Go to one state school board meeting and you will see and hear how much board members toe the line from the federal Department of Education, as they grasp for federal funds. I found this out by attending a meeting in Georgia in November where I heard a long-winded sales pitch for the Georgia Family Engagement Conference, an activity pursuant to the “Parental Engagement” section of the federal Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, where only pro-Common Core speakers were allowed. In contrast, five citizens were allowed three minutes apiece to make their case against Common Core at the state school board meeting.

As if “parental engagement” weren’t Orwellian enough, the upcoming annual meeting of the National State Boards of Education (NASBE), “a non-profit association that represents state and territorial boards of education,” has as its theme, “Leaders Learning from Leaders.” The agenda is full of Common Core buzzwords, like “career readiness,” “digital learning,” and “teacher evaluation.”

As it turns out, these “leaders” will really be learning from corporate for-profit and non-profit sponsors with strong government ties, such as Aneesh Chopra, former White House Chief Technology Officer and now Co-Founder and Executive Vice President at Hunch Analytics. The home page of Hunch Analytics tells us that “Healthcare and Education dominate 25% of the economy.” A Democratic ideologue in addition to being a techie, Chopra ran unsuccessfully for Lieutenant Governor in Virginia in 2013 and believes in public/private partnerships. He is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, founded and funded by billionaire George Soros to mobilize resources to advance a Democratic agenda. Chopra’s talk is described on the agenda as “offer[ing] an absorbing look at how open government can establish a new paradigm for the internet era and allow us to tackle our most challenging problems.”

The session, “What’s in Store on Election Day and What Does It Mean for Education?” is devoted to political prognostication by polling and public affairs companies, Public Opinion Strategies and Global Strategy Group. A session on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) is presented by Blair Blackwell of the Chevron Foundation.

The session, “State Boards and Local School Boards Working Together” with Thomas J. Gentzel, Executive Director, National School Boards Association and Kristen Amundson, Executive Director, National Association of State Boards of Education, suggests that “working together” might be more of a top-down arrangement, given what we know about how the federal-state-local relationship is arranged.

The General Session, “The New Accountability for the 21st Century” features Linda Darling-Hammond, Chris Steinhauser, superintendant of Long Beach schools, and Craig Jerald. Jerald, who holds a bachelor’s degree in sociology, is an education policy consultant, who writes frequently on such things as teacher evaluation (a big part of Common Core) for the Center for American Progress. He is now Vice President, Policy, at the College Board, the non-profit in charge of making new SAT Common Core-aligned college entrance exams and writing the new AP history exams and standards. The president of the College Board is Common Core architect David Coleman.

Darling-Hammond, the radical educator who led Obama’s education transition team, is in charge of designing one of the two national tests under Common Core, and is a collaborator and close colleague of terrorist professor Bill Ayers. It’s ironic that Darling-Hammond is featured in two panels, one on “accountability.” The Stanford New School she had founded was denied charter status in 2010 because of its performance as a “persistently worst-performing school.” Her model school, the June Jordan School for Social Equity did not meet Adequate Yearly Progress, according to an article in Educational Leadership. Yet, she is described as one of the three “thought leaders” on the panel, someone who has “developed a model for what she calls the ‘51st state’ accountability system.”

Registration fees for all this range from $775 to $875. According to Renée Rybak Lang, Communications Director for NASBE, about 150 to 200 attendees, consisting of “stakeholders,” education commissioners, policymakers, analysts, and researchers, go to each year’s meeting. About half of the attendees are members of NASBE.

Who pays the exorbitant registration fees and travel expenses?

According to Lang, “individuals” pay the costs.

According to Matthew Cardoza, Director of Communications for the Georgia Board of Education, travel expenses and registration fees are paid for by NASBE dues. This year Georgia, a super-majority Republican state, is paying $36,997 for the NASBE dues of the 14 members of the Georgia Board of Education. Two of these board members may attend the meeting, but have not yet confirmed. Sixty-percent of NASBE’s revenues come from state board of education dues.

What do Georgia taxpayers and students get for almost $37,000 for dues to this one organization? Says Cardoza in an email, “The benefit is that the board members get to share from others/find out what’s going on in other states and learn about issues that may be impacting Georgia as well. The networking from board members I am told is invaluable.”

We know that attendees will get a little junket to Denver this year, while learning how to adhere to government policy and rub shoulders with the corporate players. Questions remain: how does this benefit students and why should taxpayers have to pay for it?

Mary Grabar, Ph.D., has taught college English for over twenty years. She is the founder of the Dissident Prof Education Project, Inc., an education reform initiative that offers information and resources for students, parents, and citizens. The motto, “Resisting the Re-Education of America,” arose in part from her perspective as a very young immigrant from the former Communist Yugoslavia (Slovenia specifically). She writes extensively and is the editor of EXILED. Ms. Grabar is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis.

Paradigms and Demographics: Morning Edition

American education needs competition, not Common Core, Vicki E. Alger

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman championed individual liberty and free markets instead of bigger government. This included his belief that all parents - regardless of their incomes or addresses - should be free to choose their children's schools. Yet too often expanding government instead of freedom is the default solution to ailing schools. The Common Core State Standards are a case in point.

Supporters claim that adopting Common Core, as California has done, will provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students should know to be prepared for college and careers. On the contrary, many experts serving on Common Core review committees warn that academic rigor was compromised for the sake of political buy-in from the various political interest groups involved - including teachers unions. The curriculum is being used to advance a partisan political agenda, showcasing one-sided labor union, Obamacare and global-warming materials, along with more graphic, adult-themed books under the auspices of promoting diversity and toleration. But the politicization doesn't stop there.

Through federally funded Common Core testing consortia, non-academic, personal information is being collected about students and their parents, including family income, parents' political affiliations, their religion and students' disciplinary records - all without parental consent. That information, including Social Securitynumbers of students in at least one state, is being shared with third-party data collection firms, prompting a growing number of parents to opt their children out of Common Core.

Let’s Privatize Medicare, By John C. Goodman

Paul Ryan proposed a private health insurance alternative to Medicare for future retirees, liberal critics pounced. It’s another scheme to undermine health care for the elderly by “privatizing” and “voucher-izing” the program, they said. Yet, almost one-third of seniors are already in private health insurance plans. They are called Medicare Part C, or Medicare Advantage, plans. And you would be hard pressed to find any Democratic office holder who wants to abolish them. The reason? Seniors choose to be in these plans because they like them better than traditional Medicare. Not only do seniors like them, but they appear to provide better care for less money.

That’s the conclusion of a new studyby two Harvard University health economists, Joe Newhouse and Tom McGuire. These mainstream researchers—neither of whom can be called a right-winger—conclude that Medicare Advantage plans not only lower the cost and raise the quality of care for their enrollees, there are also spillover effects. In markets where Medicare Advantage plans have a significant presence, cost goes down and quality goes up for other patients as well—including traditional Medicare patients. Austin Frakt, another health economist (left of center politically, no less), points to some recent research that confirms the positive health benefits of private insurance for the elderly:…

Extortion 17 Parent: "The Greatest Security Threat the US faces Resides at 1600Pennsylvania Avenue", Tim Brown

Last week,Billy and Karen Vaughn, parents of fallen Navy SEALAaron Vaughn, who lost his life aboard Extortion 17,blasted Barack Obama, claiming that his "JV performance" damaged global security and cost lives. On Tuesday, the Vaughns appeared on Fox News to bolster their claims of Obama's lack of strategy against ISIS and called for his resignation. Billy Vaughn told his Fox News, "Ever since Obama has been in office, our national security has gotten worse and worse and worse. Our allies are not contacting us anymore. They are doing attacks on their own… operations on their own. Nobody respects us."…… "Billy and I are fed up with watching families suffer the same thing we've suffered, losing our only son at the hands of an administration and, frankly, senior military leaders who do not care about the boots on the ground, who care more about political positioning than the human cost of our sons and daughters being slaughtered on the battlefield with rules of engagement that favor their enemy," she said......

Corrupt Agenda: UN Orders Troops to Surrender toObama-Backed Syrian Rebels, Dean Garrison

A United Nations' peacekeeping commander ordered Filipino troops to surrender on Monday at the hands of Obama-backed Syrian rebels. Thankfully, they disobeyed that order and fought bravely for their freedom. This is just the latest example of a corrupt United Nations that is leading us all toward a New World Order. Why would anyone order a surrender to these savages when the likely reward is death? I don't know exactly. Maybe to stir up more instability in the region and provide just one more reason for more outside involvement? Either way, God Bless those Filipino troops for disobeying the order. Jim Gomez reports via The Washington Times:

The Philippine military said Monday that a U.N. peacekeeping commander in the Golan Heights should be investigated for allegedly asking Filipino troops to surrender to Syrian rebels who had attacked and surrounded their camp......

The Trillion Dollar a Year Race Industry, William Lafferty

Blacks deserve special favorable treatment, even extraordinary treatment granting them certain advantages over whites because they are unique among minority groups: they came from slavery. That's what I am told when I propose disbanding the trillion-dollar-a-year race industry, financed largely with tax dollars. See my article, Keeping Racism Alive: Ferguson Missouri. Assumed within this justification of special treatment is that those who come from a heritage of slavery have sustained injuries of such magnitude that they must be treated in ways that other injured individuals or groups are not. They must be given benefits, special allowances, support, and encouragement not available to groups who have suffered their own injuries, even though the slavery in question occurred in another century.

The problem with this assumption is that it is firmly grounded in air. So far as I know, there is no scientific support for the assumption that slavery produces a unique injury requiring over a century of remedial treatment. If it turns out that there is credible support for this idea, I too would be in favor of special treatment, but as things stand now, any special treatment given to a group whose heritage is slavery, but denied other individuals or groups who have suffered grievous injuries, is based on nothing but a supposition.......

Racism, Cowardice and Responsibility, By Steven Laib

Cowardice has been variously described over the years. When asked for a definition Microsoft Word provided several, including one from Wikipedia that seems to cover all the bases:

Cowardice is a trait wherein fear and excess self-concern override doing or saying what is right, good and of help to others or oneself in a time of need – it is the opposite of courage.

Note in the above definition indicates that cowardice overrides doing what is good or right; which is exactly what has been going on in America for decades. As one who grew up during the Civil Rights Movement years, I saw what happened all around me.

We can start with the 1950’s wherein Jim Crow still ruled much of the South, and needed to be removed. But at the time, Black Americans had advantages that they do not have today. Their families stayed together. They believed in hard work and doing your best at everything. They valued education. Brig. Gen. Ezell Ware, Jr., wrote in his autobiography, By Duty Bound, that during his youth his parents and his teachers, at a segregated school, stressed the need to outperform Whites in order to succeed. He did exactly that. Today, that work and education ethic is no longer emphasized……. Yes, there is “institutionalized racism” but the institutions involved are places such as the current US Dept. of Justice under Eric Holder. They are the organizations run by such people as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. They are groups that exist to continue the rhetoric that blames everyone but the people actually responsible for the problems we are experiencing today…

Editor’s Note: This next article is particularly important to me because it's my story. I tore the meniscus in my right knee in April of 2011, but since it was the beginning of my busy season I had to work through it, and very painfully I might add. In July I finally went in to schedule surgery for November, but unfortunately I favored the right knee because the pain increased daily, putting so much pressure on my left knee I torn the meniscus in that knee in August. Although I knew my right knee was going to have to be replaced, my left knee only had minimal pain, and only occasionally when I overdid.

The surgery on my right knee never fixed the pain and later in the winter I had the left knee repaired. But the pain never stopped, and even worsened. I asked why? The surgeon who operated on me never really explained what he was going to do, but one of my accounts asked me if he cleaned up the arthritis. I said I didn’t know if that’s what they do when they repair the meniscus. Finally I asked the surgeon and he said yes he “cleaned up the arthritis” - so I asked - why am I still in so much pain? I finally got the correct understanding from the people at re-hab. “Cleaning up the arthritis” means they grind down the cartilage and I was crippled. I couldn’t work without a cane and eventually lost a great deal of business, and I even turned down lucrative work because the pain was so great I knew I just couldn’t do it any longer.

Finally I went to two different surgeons to schedule knee replacements….both of them. When I saw the new x-rays of my left knee I was shocked at the amount of cartilage the first surgeon removed. He had crippled me unnecessarily. Without that procedure my left knee wouldn’t have had to be replaced then - and perhaps never - and please understand this -having one real knee, even with some pain is far superior to two replaced knees. I can no longer kneel, and that makes working much more difficult. Both of the new surgeons told me they don’t perform that procedure much anymore because it causes more problems than it solves.

Make sure to ask exactly what they’re going to do if you go in for meniscus repairs – or any knee surgery for that matter - and ask if they plan on grinding down the cartilage in your knee(s). Then go to another doctor, preferable from a younger generation, for another opinion. Don’t allow anyone to cripple you as I did through my ignorance! No matter how much research I did on this subject I still didn’t know what questions to ask.

No one is going to tell you what I’m telling you now. Now you know!

Knee osteoarthritis sufferers may not benefit fromcartilage surgery

Posted on September 2, 2014 by admin

Osteoarthritis (OA) is extremely common in adults. According to the Arthritis Foundation, about 27 million people in the United States have osteoarthritis, the most commonly affected area being the knee. Many of those affected suffer from degenerative meniscal tears, which are sometimes treated with surgery. However, a new meta-analysis found that arthroscopic surgery for these tears was not associated with improvement in function of or pain in the knee.

Dr. Moin Khan of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario and colleagues conducted a systematic review of seven randomized trials including 805 subjects looking at arthroscopic surgery versus non-operative management in patients with mild knee OA. Mean age of the subjects was 56. Overall, researchers found no association between surgery and improvement in function or pain scores. Furthermore, the researchers found that surgery was not associated with any improvement in pain at six months following the surgery. The studies used the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score – an instrument assessing patients’ opinion about their knee that asks questions related to physical function and daily life, as well as sports and recreation –to reach these conclusions.

According to the researchers, “The results of this meta-analysis suggest that an initial trial of non-operative interventions should play a large role for middle-aged patients.”

ACSH’s Dr. Gilbert Ross had this comment: “This meta-analysis clearly indicates that surgery should not be the first option for meniscal tears associated with knee OA. In fact, previous studies have found that weight loss is often an effective tool in helping to keep knee OA under control, as knee joint deterioration is well known to be accelerated by obesity. Therefore, a behavioral intervention should be considered first, depending on the patient. For more advanced OA, with life-altering pain or loss of function, the advances in total knee replacement surgery — truly a miracle of modern medicine of only thirty-plus years existence — is available to improve many OA patients’ lives.”

ACSH’s Dr. Josh Bloom adds, “However, it should also be considered that arthroscopic surgery for a torn meniscus can still be necessary when the tear is severe enough that the torn piece can get caught in the knee joint, essentially locking up the knee. This can be very damaging if it is not dealt with, and patients should talk to their doctors about their options. And of course, acutely traumatized knees do need urgent intervention, notwithstanding this new study.

Global Warming Policy Foundation Launches Campaigning Arm

London, 2 September 2014

Five years after its inauguration in 2009, the Global Warming Policy Foundation is pleased to announce the launch of its new campaigning arm, the Global Warming Policy Forum. The new organisation will be able to conduct campaigns and activities which do not fall squarely within the Foundation’s remit as an educational charity. This arrangement reflects those used by other organisations with dual structures, such as Amnesty International UK and Greenpeace UK.

The Global Warming Policy Foundation’s news and opinion pieces will henceforth be covered by the new website of the Global Warming Policy Forum, as will the CCNet newsletter, founded and edited by Dr Benny Peiser since 1997.  The Foundation will continue to advance its charitable objects by commissioning and publishing reports and papers and by organising lectures and debates on key matters relating to climate science and policy.

“While the Foundation will continue to publish our reports and videos, the Forum will campaign in a way that will make our work even more effective,” said Dr Peiser, the Director of both arms of the GWPF.  Lord Lawson, the chairman of both GWPF arms said: “This reorganisation will enable us to build on the progress of the past five years and make substantial further progress over the next five – years which may well be decisive in the evolution of climate change policy.”  The new organisation is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

In recent years, the GWPF’s influence has grown rapidly, among both UK and international policy makers and the news media and is widely regarded as one of the world’s leading think tanks on global warming policy issues.

Key campaigning issues

For balanced science and policy research

Climate science and climate policies are faced by rising doubt and criticism. There is growing concern about the integrity of climate scientists and the maltreatment of sceptical researchers. The Forum will be campaigning for more balanced and more transparent assessments of climate science and policy research.

For open and sceptical scienceClimate alarmism suffers from a manifest lack of scientific scrutiny. Instead of carefully assessing the quality and reliability of climate data, many climate scientists cherry-pick numbers and interpretations that seem to confirm their alarmist conviction. Reliable and trustworthy science requires a sober and detached consideration of all relevant evidence. The Forum will campaign for an open scientific debate which allows for all reasonable arguments and criticism to be voiced and published.

Against bias and alarmThe coverage of climate change in the news media has been stromgly biased in favour of alarm. For far too long, scientific organisations and the mainstream media have failed to give appropriate space to authoritative critics of climate alarmism. The Forum will campaign for more objective media reporting.

For economic scrutiny and realism:European and other governments have burdened their countries with unilateral and hugely expensive climate and green energy targets. As a direct result, energy prices and fuel poverty are rising in many countries, making them poorer and less competitive. Rejecting economically damaging climate and energy policies, the Forum will be campaigning for cost-effective alternatives that will help to make our societies more resilient and more competitive.

Against green unilateralismThe international deadlock on a new UN climate treaty shows that unilateral climate policies have failed. The Forum will be campaigning for the development of alternative approaches that are politically realistic and economically feasible.

FundingThe Global Warming Policy Forum will be funded by private donations. In order to make clear their complete independence, neither the Foundation nor the Forum accept gifts from either energy companies or anyone with a significant interest in an energy company.

The Global Warming Policy Forum Team

Board Members
Lord Lawson (Chairman)
Nigel Lawson (Conservative member of the House of Lords) was Secretary of State for Energy (1981-83) and Chancellor of the Exchequer (1983-89). He is author of An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming, 2008.

Edward Atkin CBE
Edward Atkin founded and created Avent in 1994, the world’s No 1 in Baby Feeding hardware. He is a multiple Queen’s Award winner for Technology as well as Exports. Mr Atkin helped create what is now the Reuters Institute for Journalism at Oxford University and owns a R&D centre in Cambridge dealing advanced transport technologies.

Neil Record
Educated at Oxford and London Universities, Neil Record started his career as an Economist at the Bank of England. He is the chairman and founder of Record plc (1983). Mr Record is a Visiting Fellow and Investment Committee member of Nuffield College (Oxford), a Trustee of the Institute of Economic Affairs (London) and a Governor of Magdalen College School (Oxford).

Director
Dr Benny Peiser

Science Editor
Dr David Whitehouse

Senior Researcher
Daniel Mahoney