If you can't score, just move the goal-posts

As you know, scientists compare the severity of hurricane seasons by the number of named hurricanes, and the criteria for naming any single storm are exceedingly strict. We've been breathlessly warned for years by nutty environmentalists like the Goreacle about how global warming and George Bush are conspiring to create bigger and more frequent hurricanes. But those hysterical predictions have fallen flatter than Dennis Kucinich's poll numbers. (The last two years since Katrina have been two of the calmest on record.) But never ones to give up on their dream of death and destruction, the global-warming cultists at the National Hurricane Center have decided to start naming tropical storms now that there are no hurricanes to speak of. After all, they can't have the citizenry NOT believing in global warming now can they?

With another hurricane season set to end this Friday, a controversy is brewing over decisions of the National Hurricane Center to designate several borderline systems as tropical storms.

Some meteorologists, including former hurricane center director Neil Frank, say as many as six of this year's 14 named tropical systems might have failed in earlier decades to earn "named storm" status.

"They seem to be naming storms a lot more than they used to," said Frank, who directed the hurricane center from 1974 to 1987 and is now chief meteorologist for KHOU-TV. "This year, I would put at least four storms in a very questionable category, and maybe even six."

Most of the storms in question briefly had tropical storm-force winds of at least 39 mph. But their central pressure — another measure of intensity — suggested they actually remained depressions or were non-tropical systems.

Any inconsistencies in the naming of tropical storms and hurricanes have significance far beyond semantics.

The number of a season's named storms forms the foundation of historical records used to determine trends in hurricane activity. Insurance companies use these trends to set homeowners' rates. And such information is vital to scientists trying to determine whether global warming has had a measurable impact on hurricane activity.

So now whenever there's a sprinkle outside, count on the stooges at the NHC to give it a name. Look forward to Scattered Shower Mike, Breezy and Cool Nancy, and Thunder Storm Hector. Rather than admit that man cannot dictate or change the weather by driving Priuses, reading by candle-light, or using less toilet paper, the shameless Gaia worshippers at the NHC will just name everything that produces wind and rain and keep their statistics up. Uh oh, it's starting to get cloudy, our home insurance might go up.

Let's name this Shemp...



This one Curly...



And this one we'll call Moe.

Reader comments

Alert reader freedom2learn wrote in regarding the participation of the U.S. in the abysmal, despotic collection of thugs and tyrants known as the United Nations...

Does the US want the UN having (increasing) power that we have no control over at all?

When did the US get involved with
the UN?

Was this woman's story[Teddy Bear named Mohammed] highly publicized?

Firstly, the U.S. signed on to the UN in San Francisco in 1945 following the end of WWII, along with all the other countries. It was devised as a collective body to diffuse conflicts between countries before they erupt into world war. It's a nice concept if that's all it did, but you and I know better. Let's assume for a minute that countries were willing to surrender their sovereignty to the UN, which we won't do but just for argument's sake, the UN resolutions are non-binding, meaning you don't have to comply if you don't want to. Without the teeth of enforcement, what's the point? Gulf wars I and II were begun because the US had to be the teeth of enforcement on behalf of the UN. And we were willing to be the teeth of the UN because it was America the terrorists were/are targeting. Over the years the UN has devolved into a bickering collection of self-serving representatives who're corrupt to the core. The Iraqi oil-for-food scandal, the largest scandal in the history of the world in terms of dollars, was administered by Kofi Annan himself, his son, the French, Germans, and others at the UN. Yet the US taxpayer continues to be mugged into underwriting the activities of the crooks under UN protection.

To answer the first question: if you are a multinationalist like Hillary and other democrats, you think the U.S. is too powerful and it's not fair that we are so rich and others are so poor by comparison. The idea of a world government overseeing a socialist utopia in which wealth is taken from those who earn it and given to other countries who didn't, is the stuff of your fondest dreams. In short, yes, liberals would cede sovereignty of the US over to the UN and would submit to it's will. The thought of that makes me vomit a little bit in my mouth. It should do that for anyone who truly loves this country.

Question 3: She was arrested a few months ago but the story didn't reach the news services until her sentence was announced. Curiously, the biggest defenders of womens' rights, N.O.W., is refusing to even comment on it. For the same reason Pat Ireland and the gals over at NOW sided with Bill Clinton in the face of multiple rape and harrassment accusations by numerous women, politics is the true trump card for feminists, not womens' rights. Right now, Muslims are the darlings of the media and as such, they can do no wrong. Just like Bill Clinton, as long as he advanced the abortion agenda, he could/and did literally get away with rape in the eyes of the gals at NOW.

I hope that helped freedom.

It's Ann Coulter Thursday!

This week Ann continues ridiculing the floundering New York Times for propping up the phony notion that "many" Americans want illegal aliens to have a path to citizenship....they don't. The NYT is a shill for liberals and that alone explains their plumeting readership. Go here and read her article. Scathing and caustic as usual.

Socialism is on it's way

The other day BO had just finished questioning Bill Clinton's false claim that he was originally against the war, then the questioning changed topics and this tidbit was predictably glossed over by the media...

When asked about the difference between his health care plan and Sen. Hillary Clinton's plan, Obama said they're not all that different.

But, he said, Clinton has not specified how she would enforce a mandate for coverage.

"[It's] more of a political point that she's trying to make rather than a real point," Obama said.

The issue of mandates for health care has driven the debate between Clinton and Obama for the past few weeks. Obama says he would enforce his mandate for health care for all children by fining parents if they refused to allow health care coverage for their children.

"I am happy to be very clear how we enforce mandates for children, and the reason is because children don't have an option."


So President Obama will use the power of the federal government to force American families to fork over money for a health-care program in which they do not want to participate? Then if they wisely refuse, he'll fine them? How much? What happens when they refuse to pay? Will he garnish their wages to generously pay for the health-care of degenerate riff-raff who choose to remain unemployed and poor? What if the family is self-employed? Will doctors become agents of the Imperial State, ratting out families who they know aren't participating? Will children in school be encouraged to alert teachers/snitches if they know their parents are against nationalized health-care? As a last resort, will BO throw parents in jail for non-participation? What will happen to children whose parents refuse to participate no matter what? Will they be placed in State orphanages?

You think I'm being hysterical but seriously think it through, once you start down he road of the federal government forcing free citizens to participate against their will, in a program based on socialism, what are the teeth of enforcement? Without teeth, there is only chaos and lawlessness....witness the immigration program. There is only one program I can think of in which each American is forced to participate....the seizure from our checks of federal income taxes. The enforcement teeth of that progam are heavy fines, financial ruin at the hands of the federal government agents, jail time, lasting credit and financial scars that follow over a lifetime. Is that the kind of teeth BO is talking about when he says "enforcement"? Is that the kind of President you want for America?

Finally and most importantly, where exactly in the Constitution is the power of forced socialized health-care awarded to the federal government?

The creeping rot of socialism is coming to America people and you'd better wake up and do something about it. Every day Congress is looking for ways to get around the Constitution and saddle us with socialist policies like universal health-care while we sit around watching MTV, pretending to be horrified when Britney shows her privates yet again this week. There is a lot at stake next year. Educate yourselves, pay attention, and vote for the candidate who most mirrors your ideals.

Close to home

I didn't plan for this week to be an anti-Islam rant but those crazy radicals leave me no choice....their anti-social antics are dominating the news cycle. Here's more...

VILLIERS-LE-BEL, France - Rampaging youths rioted for a second night in Paris' suburbs, firing at officers and ramming burning cars into buildings. At least 77 officers were injured, a senior police union official said Tuesday.

The overnight violence was more intense than during three weeks of rioting in 2005, said the official, Patrice Ribeiro. He said that "genuine urban guerillas with conventional weapons and hunting weapons" were among the rioters.

The riots were triggered by the deaths of two teens killed in a crash with a police patrol car on Sunday in Villiers-le-Bel, a blue-collar town in Paris' northern suburbs.

Notice anything missing from the article? Conspicuously absent is the common nationality of the "youths". Care to take a wild shot in the dark? That's right, they're the shiftless degenerate kids of Muslim immigrants. They dropped out of school, refuse to get jobs, and though they enjoy the generous socialist benefits of French citizenship, they remain hostile to conformity and authority.

This is what happens when you get a critical mass of unassimilated, disaffected, people of a foreign nationality who don't identify with the nationality of the host country. They become hostile and cause trouble. Don't be surprised when this sort of thing starts to happen in the southwest U.S. as huge numbers of unassimilated Mexicans overrun the cities there.

The Religion of Peace strikes again.....literally

UPDATE: Yesterday I told you about the British first-grade teacher in the Sudan who was arrested for allowing her children to name a stuffed teddy bear Mohammed. She was sentenced to 80 lashes for defaming the name of the great and benevolent prophet. It is not uncommon for people to suffer permanent, even life-threatening, damage from such punishment. And for what, because her Muslim first-graders named a teddy-bear the most common name in Islam....Mohammed.

What's in Ed's CD player this week?

I know you're sitting out there frittering away your employer's valuable time reading TRR, and in addition to wondering, "How long before the boss fires me?", you're also probably wondering, "What's that Ed listening to these days?"

Well I'm glad you asked. Here's the eclectic mix to which I've been jamming today...

Meat Puppets...Too High To Die

Expanding Man...Head to the Ground

David Sanborn...Upfront

The Cure...The Cure

Tom Petty...Wildflowers

The Jayhawks...Tomorrow the Green Grass

Semisonic...Great Divide

Save the whales....take a leak in the ocean

Just when you thought the global-warming fanatics couldn't get any stupider, they manage to plumb the depths of idiocy a little deeper...

Proposals to dump large quantities of nitrogen-rich chemical in the Pacific as a quick fix for climate change have emerged at a UN treaty meeting in London.

An Australian company is planning to dump 500 tons of urea into the sea between Philippines and Borneo in order to stimulate algal blooms.

Governments meeting to discuss whether the oceans should be used for experiments aimed at "fixing" carbon from the atmosphere heard that an Australian company is planning to dump 500 tons of industrially-produced urea - a substance that naturally occurs in urine - into the sea between Philippines and Borneo.

The idea is to pump the urea into barren areas of the ocean on the edge of the continental shelf to stimulate the growth of plant plankton.

Phytoplankton absorb carbon dioxide from sea water. Fish eat them and when they die some fall to the bottom, potentially removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

You know how when you're in the ocean swimming and that patch of warmer ocean water floats by? Turns out it's not just the sunshine differentially warming the water. It's a smug, annoying environmentalist standing next to you saving the whales by peeing on your leg. (Yuck!)

The Religion of Peace on display

All right all you Islam defenders, read this ridiculous story and then tell me Islam isn't a radical religion. Remember this is the Sudan, not Iran, or Saudi Arabia...

A British schoolteacher has been arrested in Sudan accused of insulting Islam's Prophet, after she allowed her pupils to name a teddy bear Muhammad.

Colleagues of Gillian Gibbons, 54, from Liverpool, said she made an "innocent mistake" by letting the six and seven-year-olds choose the name.

Ms Gibbons was arrested after several parents made complaints.

The BBC's correspondent Amber Henshaw said Ms Gibbons' punishment could be up to six months in jail, 40 lashes or a fine.

Seriously, how many women have to get stoned, gang-raped, beaten to within an inch of their lives, how many homosexuals have to be hung by the neck, how many violent riots, how much destruction, misery, and chaos in the name of defending Islam does there have to be before you admit that Islam is a radical religion that is incompatible with what educated, reasonable people recognize as fundamental human rights?

And I don't want to hear, "But Ed, these instances are isolated, not the norm. Islam is peaceful when practiced as it was intended"

Wrong you are! Where exactly is Islam practiced peacefully? Only one place...the U.S. But that's only because stoning, rape, and hanging are crimes regardless of their religious mandate. You wait, at some point an Islamic sect will petition for and be awarded, in the U.S., an Islamic sanctuary in which they can practice Sharia law regardless of it's lawlessness and cruelty.

No, these actions are not isolated individuals acting on their own. Each instance we hear about is the result of nation state embracing parts of the radical form of Islam as law, then acting accordingly. Whether it's stonings in Pakistan, honor-killings in India, rapes and hangings in Iran, lashing in Saudi Arabia, or incarceration and whipping in the Sudan, these are States enforcing radical Islam as law.

Religion of Peace.....that phrase rings a tad hollow to the girl in Saudi Arabia who received at the hands of the State, 200 lashes last week for having gotten raped.

The real objective behind the global warming hoax

The slimey group of degenerates, thugs, and leeches collectively known as the United Nations is taking an all-expenses-paid luxury vacation to Bali to discuss, over fruity drinks with umbrellas, the wholly imaginary global-warming crisis. All flying in one big jet to reduce their carbon emissions I would guess.....well, guess again...

(11/3/2007) Tempo Interaktif reports that Angkasa Pura - the management of Bali's Ngurah Rai International Airport are concerned that the large number of additional private charter flights expected in Bali during the UN Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC) December 3-15, 2007, will exceed the carrying capacity of apron areas. To meet the added demand for aircraft storage officials are allocating "parking space" at other airports in Indonesia.

The hypocrisy of UN bureaucrats, and American politicians, knows no bounds. I'm sure the Goreacle will be on hand to bless the proceedings by sprinkling holy water collected from melting glaciers or some such idiocy. I wonder how many American families could exist for a year, and still not equal the carbon footprint of one flight in a Leer jet to Bali?

Q: Why is the US taxpayer the primary funding source for this repulsive club for America-haters? Answer: Because breathless panic over climate change is only the red herring for what's really happening. By alarming everybody about phony climate change, politicians in the US of both parties, are counting on the stupid American populace to clamor for rescue and for our government to save us from the global warming boogey-man. They know that once we are sufficiently alarmed about the looming crisis, no matter how imaginary, we will submit to any curtailing of our activities because after-all, it's for the greater good. We'll allow our government to curtail our consumption of goods and food, our travel habits, our waste, our spending, where we can go on vacation, the list goes on and on of the facets of our lives our government desires to control. Politicians always want to control more and more of your lives. It's the source of the political power to which they are addicted.

And the bigger picture is that the UN wants to control our government, which is in control of us. The UN wants the US to cede control of the internet over to it. The UN wants to tax the US for having a carbon footprint that is too big. The UN wants to have control over the US military to use as it's private meals-on-wheels unit to send to anywhere in the world they wish....meals funded entirely by the US taxpayer of course. The UN wants to have observatory rights over our elections to make sure they are "fair"---translated, to make sure a good UN-loving liberal like Hillary is President. The UN wants the US to ask permission from it whenever we need to defend ourselves, either pre-emptively or reactionarily.

You see, this whole global warming nonsense isn't about saving the planet. It's about controlling the lives of the little people, specifically the lives of American little people. Heaven help us if Hillary gets voted queen of America.