• Home
• About

Subscribe

Climate Change and a Convenient Untruth - Part 5

Is Australia’s present drought a sign of global warming?

In our examination of the international controversy that is climate change and global warming, we’ve looked at the positions of both parties - the Scaremongers who fully support the theory, and the Idealists who want more concrete evidence. However in Australia much of the so-called support for the ‘Yes’ case is based on distorted information, untruths, and naked lies.

Australia has always been at the mercy of Nature

Of all the countries in the western world, Australia is the one that suffers most from the vagaries of the weather. At any one time, part of the country experiences drought. At the moment large parts of inland Australia on the Pacific side of the country are experiencing this problem whilst other areas are enjoying more favorable conditions.

The Scaremongers believe the present drought is the worst ever - it may be the worst in living memory, but it’s not the worst since European civilization started in 1788. The Federation drought of 1895 to 1903 is considered to be the one that caused the most damage to the economy and life in general.

The farming community in rural Australia accept drought as a normal aspect of life. Since the 1860s there have been 9 periods of major and prolonged drought covering large areas of the country, excluding the current situation. In addition there has been 6 droughts during this period covering smaller regions of the country.

During the periods of pre-European settlement, that is pre-1788, when industrial pollution could not have caused greenhouse gases and therefore affected climate change, droughts were just as prevalent. Examination of rings on trees and coral support this view. In fact examination of a piece of coral taken from the Barrier Reef in northern Australia shows that there was a drought in that region lasting 20 years from 1660.

Drought is a regular feature of Australian life

However, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that droughts are a regular occurrence of Australian farming life, the media still push the line that the present drought is caused by global warming. Even the saner and more responsible parts of the press insist that Australia’s current predicament is being exacerbated by the government’s late signing of the Kyoto agreement.

Just more unsupported distortions of the truth from the people who are happiest when they’re dispelling doom and gloom.

Droughts in Australia are caused by, and have always been caused by, the activity of the El Nino Southern Oscillation - ELSO. This is a complex weather pattern that influences climatic conditions throughout the Pacific region. This phenomenon only became known in the late 70s and although much more work needs to be done to understand its complexity, weather scientists are now able to determine the influence it has on countries bordering the south Pacific fairly accurately.

The average Australian now believes drought is caused by climate change

However, the average man in the street now believes changes in climatic conditions in Australia are caused by global warming, rather than the more likely affect of the ELSO. Aided by the local media who attribute every unusual circumstance to world-wide global warming, from the increase in bush-fires to the desalination problems of the River Murray to the decline in coral growth on the Great Barrier Reef, the gullible public blindly follow what they’ve been told.

So successful are the Scaremongers in Australia that 2 out of 3 people writing letters to the press and web sites vigorously support the concept of man-made global warming. In actual fact, Australia’s last Federal election, in November 2007, was won by the party most vocal in supporting this theory. A gullible public were frightened into voting for a party that claimed to be able to play God.

As an indication of the untruths and down right lies coming from the Australian Scaremongers camp, consider this gem - taken from the very best Joseph Goebbels propaganda manual:

…but in 2007 our Prime Minister still finds it hard to accept the possible existence of a human driven climate change.

Taken from http://home.iprimus.com.au/foo7/droughthistory.html

So what this web site, and other similar ones, is saying is that every climatic disaster that’s occurred in the last 50 to 100 years has been caused by man-made climate change, but they don’t know what caused climatic disasters before that.

Quite plain and simple, an increase in greenhouse gases by the burning of fossil fuels, allegedly causing climate change cannot be proven or supported by the sparse facts presented by its gullible supporters. Hysteria outweighs credible facts.

This is the fifth part of an attempt to put some balance into the ongoing international controversy that is the theory of man-made climate change.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Climate Change and a Convenient Untruth - Part 4

The theory of man-made climate change is based on mass hysteria not proven facts

In the previous three articles about the world-wide controversy that is global warming, the position of the people who support this theory - the Scaremongers - has been explained and their core arguments commented upon. They seem to be winning the propaganda war, but their battle tactics are based on the feeble interpretation of recent data. The facts presented by the Idealists, however, are much more sustainable but are ignored by the Scaremongers.

The indication from reading the web sites of the major news organizations is that the pro-warming lobby enjoys support from one third of the public, whilst two out of three says more evidence is needed. That is the common view throughout most of the world.

However in some countries, the reverse is the case. There 2 out of 3 people believe that global warming is occurring and that it’s caused by man. In these countries it’s very easy for politicians to seek electoral advantage by promising a range of policies that gullible people think will stop global warming.

But generally the world media believes that every major problem that comes about is being caused by global warming: drought in Australia; famine in eastern Africa; violent storms in the Caribbean; or melting glaciers. The mass media jump on this and in their desire to be seen as ‘leaders’ in the debate, push the ‘Yes’ case without giving any detailed comment or supporting facts.

Lets look at just a few examples, bearing in mind that the ‘Yes’ case tell us that world climate has got warmer with adverse climatic conditions becoming more extreme and violent.

The ten fiercest and most violent hurricanes to affect the US all occurred before 1950. Likewise with the ten most powerful tornadoes, none have happened in the past 50 years. And yet the Scaremongers and the international media continue to tell us that present day hurricanes and tornadoes are getting more and more powerful. Why is the public not being told the truth?

The ‘Yes’ people like to justify their case by suggesting that famine in Africa is being caused by global warming causing difficult growing conditions. In fact the real cause of the problem is poor government and deforestation. But the UN is not going to state the real causes as it would conflict with its position of not commenting on the poor governance the people of Africa are experiencing.

In the case of Australia, the ‘Yes’ people would have us believe that the current drought is the worst in the country’s history and is due entirely to man-made global warming. On both counts they are wrong. Australia’s worst drought since European settlement occurred between 1893 and 1904, well outside the time-frame suggested by the Scaremongers that greenhouse gases started to increase. They also state that the present poor condition of the River Murray - Australia’s largest - is an example of their theory. Again they are wrong. From time to time the Murray has had problems with lack of water supply - that’s happening today, and will continue in the future.

The ‘Yes’ case would like us to believe their case is proven. They tell us that because 5,000 scientists in the US have signed a petition confirming their support for the theory, then it must be true.

What they won’t tell us is that 31,000 US scientists, including over 9,000 PhDs, say the theory is just plain wrong. And that there’s no proof whatsoever that global warming, if indeed it’s taking place and is unique in the life of the earth, has been caused by mankind’s activities. But of course the media is not going to make too much of this - it’s not news. They have an interest in keeping the story going.

Some observers say that the Scaremongers are the same sort of people who 30 years ago suggested that the West was responsible for all the world’s problems: friction with the European eastern bloc; the military build-up and the obscene amounts of money spent on weapons of war; US support for right-wing dictatorships in central and southern America, and Asia; and lastly western support for Israel’s position in the Middle East.

Now it’s said that these people support the theory of man-made global warming because it lays the blame at the feet of the industrial west. A position the UN seems happy to support as it fails to recognize the role played by land deforestation, which occurs principally in the poorer, non-industrialized countries, and over-population.

The Idealists suggest that one of the biggest failings of the ‘Yes’ case is that the supporters are not prepared to look at the big picture. They seem focused on data collected over the past 110 years but more particularly the last 50 years. They won’t ask questions or provide solutions concerning events that have happened in the centuries before then.

In fact the biggest criticism leveled at the Scaremongers is that they approach the topic in a wholly unscientific and poorly researched manner with a disregard for translating data in a professional way. Hysteria rules rather than a calm, measured look at the problem.

For the Scaremongers to convince people that man-made global warming is under way, the evidence they produce has to be more credible.

This is the fourth part of a look at the international controversy concerning the cause of climate change, and an attempt to put some balance into the argument.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Climate Change and a Convenient Untruth - Part 3

Climate change is an ongoing part of the evolution of Earth

In the two previous parts of this investigation the basic differences between those who support the man-made global warming theory and those who don’t has been highlighted. It’s time now to look at the past history of periods of world-wide climate change.

The scientific community agree that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old and during that time, it’s undergone at least 12, and possibly 14 major periods of climate change. In addition to this there have been numerous minor changes to the earth’s climate.

The information about pre-man climate changes has come from studying ice cores and from sophisticated scientific investigation involving many branches of science. However some of these minor changes have occurred within the life-time of man and have been recorded over time.

The existence of these major and minor periods of climate change is not in doubt; what is open to speculation and controversy are the causes.

On this, the Scaremongers remain totally silent: they are emphatic that mans’ industrial activity and the burning of fossil fuels is the cause of any climate change taking place at the moment, but would have to agree that industrial activity could not have caused the start of a period of climate change 5,000 years ago.

In 1991 the body of a man was found in the European Alps in the border regions of Austria and Italy. He was said to have died about 5,000 years ago whilst crossing the Alps. From this two facts can be determined: man at that time knew he could cross the Alps; secondly this feat was possible because of the absence of snow and ice at lower altitudes.

2800 years later occurred the first recorded historical event involving man crossing the Alps. That was Hannibal’s crossing of the Alps with an army, including elephants, to wage war on the Roman Empire. This event was clearly documented at the time and is today accepted as a historical fact.

When this event was taking place, the snowline of the Alps was estimated to be in the region of 1,800 to 2,000 meters above sea level. Until recently the Alpine snowline was approximately 1,500 meters above sea level. What this means is that in modern times the level above sea at which snow falls and lies on the ground is about 300 to 500 meters lower than when Hannibal achieved his feat. So during the past 2200 years the earth’s temperature has fallen to enable snow and ice to settle at these lower altitudes. However in Hannibal’s time and the centuries earlier going back to 3,000 BCE the air temperature was considerably warmer that it is today.

From this scientists know that the world’s climate has changed over the past 5,000 years. So what’s caused this change?

The activities of Man? Unlikely.

The work of Nature or the Almighty? Probably.

Is there a definite answer? No.

Lets now look at more recent times and consider the recorded history of events that took place in London.

Between 1660 and 1820 is was quite a common occurrence for the river Thames to freeze over; not every year, but certainly enough for people at that time to make comments. Since the mid 19th century the Thames has rarely been frozen, certainly never in recent memory. So the question needs to be answered: what caused the warming of the air from 1820 onwards?

At the same period of time from 1660, the Great Barrier Reef in Australia was subject to stress caused by an event that lasted 20 years. Coral has characteristics not unlike that of trees. Rings in a piece of sliced coral tell the story of climatic events long ago. A piece of coral collected off the coast of northern Australia has recently been examined and it shows the effects of drought in the region. Lack of fresh water, and therefore the absences of nutrients, coming from the nearby rivers would affect the growth of the coral and would be noticed in examining the rings. The coral showed a period of about 20 years of severe drought in this region.

In the years since then the reef has made a full recovery, although it may be suffering now.

The ‘Yes’ case points to the decline in coral reefs as an example of global warming, but ignore the fact that Nature has the remarkable capacity to rejuvenate stressed coral.

The known history of the world has numerous events that took place long ago that couldn’t happen now:

1) The indigenous people of Australia came from SE Asia via a continuous land mass leading from the Malay peninsula, through Indonesia, New Guinea, and into northern Australia.

2) The native Indians of north America are thought to have entered the continent about 10,000 years ago via the land mass across the Bering Straits. That feat couldn’t be achieved today.

3) Likewise the original inhabitants of the UK are thought to have come from Europe via the land mass that connected mainland Europe to Britain. This is now covered by the English Channel.

From these events of long ago, its plain to see that sea levels rose covering once-accessible traffic routes.

And the most likely causes of the rise in sea levels - global warming causing polar ice-caps to melt. But what could have caused this? Well definitely not man’s industrial activity. So it must have been the action of Nature, or the Almighty.

That being the case, isn’t it more likely that if global warming is taking place today, it’s being caused by the same influence that caused the previous periods of climate change?

This is the third part of a look at the international controversy concerning the cause of climate change, and an attempt to put some balance into the argument.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Climate Change and a Convenient Untruth - Part 2

A campaign of deception or ignorance?

In the first part of our look at the controversial theory of man-made global warming the issues presented by both those who believe in this theory - the Scaremongers - and those who don’t - the Idealists - were analyzed and compared. Looking at the Scaremonger’s position the question needs to be asked: are they scientifically ignorant, or are they engaged in deception?

Better quality data needed before a trend can determined

The whole position and argument put forward by the ‘Yes’ case to support their position comes from data collected over the past 50 years. This data is then compared with data collected since the 1890s - when climatic data first became of interest to scientists - and from the changes a wholly unrealistic assumption is made.

There are two major issues with this:

Firstly, the instruments and equipment used today to measure such factors as air temperature, sea temperature etc. are considerably more accurate than those in use 50 years ago, let alone 110 years ago. So that raises the question - how accurate is any data collected more than 10 years ago? The ‘Yes’ case needs to clarify this point.

The second issue concerns the number of years over which the current data has been collected. 110 years may provide a start, but it’s nowhere near long enough from which to predict the future . Realistically though, 110 years in comparison to the scientifically recognized age of the earth - 4.5 billion years - is meaningless.

To get a valid and significant understanding of the recent changes in the worlds’ temperature - if indeed there has been any abnormal changes - and to try to determine future trends in the area of climate change, the absolute minimum period from which such data is collected should be no less than a thousand years.

Of course this is not possible, but it doesn’t give the ‘Yes’ case the right to give credibility to the limited data they have by suggesting something that can’t be proven. All this approach does is give ammunition to the emotionally immature.

Whilst all of this may point to an incorrect and highly contentious interpretation of the available facts, the role of the UN could be considered as blatant deception.

The role of the UN in this deception

Recent reports issued by the UN’s committee on man-made climate change laid the blame for this perceived problem clearly at the feet of the industrial western world. Two reports presented in early 2007 pointed to the damage being caused by the burning of fossil fuels leading to an increase in greenhouse gases, and an imbalance between the CO2 and oxygen in the worlds’ atmosphere. The UN said quite clearly that this problem was caused by the ever-increasing expansion of industrial activity by the established western nations and the emerging industrial countries, notably China and India.

The other factors that could be responsible for this atmospheric imbalance - factors that could have a profound influence - were not mentioned at all or were given little attention.

Firstly no mention was made of the practice prevalent in third world countries of mass deforestation by burning thus emitting carbon dioxide into the air. Also as trees emit oxygen and take in CO2 they’re able to help keep in balance the relationship between these two gases.

The other factor the UN failed to mention was the explosion in the worlds’ population over the past 50 years. In that time world population has grown from 2 billion to over 6 billion and third world countries have been responsible for the greater part of this.

If the increase in greenhouse gases has been caused by man’s activities then all of man’s actions should be taken into account. The UN do themselves no justice by highlighting only the actions of the industrialized and emerging nations. If the UN is to enjoy any credibility on this issue, then it must mention that deforestation and an unregulated population explosion may also be to blame.

Scaremongers: Our proof is strong and convincing

That’s what they insist on, but closer examination shows otherwise.

Most of the ‘proof’ they offer is weak and totally unconvincing.

Why do they continually repeat the lie that of the ten hottest years on record, six have occurred within the past 10 years? This has been seen to be false - it’s recently been reported that the 10 hottest years occurred before 1950, with the hottest decade being the 30s.

But what’s so important about the last 110 years, the number of years that climatic data has been collected? Now if those years had been the hottest in the last 1000 years, then that would have greater importance.

Why does the ‘Yes’ case refuse to ignore the one question that would give their theory credibility - what caused climate change in the 12 previous occasions it’s occurred during the life of the earth?

After 12 periods of climate change caused by Nature, why should the activities of man be responsible for present events?

And this last point raises a very interesting question - what gives the ‘Yes’ case the right to think they can reverse the work of Nature or God? What gives Al Gore and his like the right to think they can undo God’s work?

And why are the worlds’ religious leaders saying nothing about this?

This is the second part of a look at the international controversy concerning the cause of climate change, and an attempt to put some balance into the argument.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Climate Change and a Convenient Untruth - Part 1

Climate change - fact or fiction?

In the past dozen years or so a major controversy has developed through out the world about changes that are supposedly taking place with the earth’s climate. There is a large body of opinion that believes the earth’s temperature is getting warmer due to the increase in greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), caused by the burning of fossil fuels and increasing industrial activity, and unless governments take action to remedy the situation then mankind is in serious trouble.

This theory is not believed by everyone. Indeed there are many eminent scientists who have said that the theory has no credibility as the evidence presented by its supporters is inconclusive. So there are two schools of thought on this matter, each adamant that they’re right:

1) Those who believe implicitly that global warming is taking place and that man is entirely responsible by increasing the amount of carbon dioxide ( a ‘greenhouse’ gas) in the atmosphere. I call these people the Scaremongers.

2) Those who believe that much more evidence is needed before any categorical claims can be made. I call these people Idealists.

So lets have a closer look at the issues raised by these two factions:

The Scaremongers predict doom and gloom

The ‘Yes’ case says emphatically that the earth is getting warmer at an increasing rate, posing a dangerous threat to the future of mankind. They say that the increase in global temperatures over the past 50 years has been caused by a world-wide increase in industrial activity during that same period and earlier. They also suggest that the problem is getting progressively worse and that higher temperatures will lead to melting ice in the polar regions; higher sea levels causing world-wide flooding; more violent storms, hurricanes, typhoons etc; problems in the production of food; and a wide number of other circumstances that could pose problems for life on earth.

The ‘Yes’ case’s solution is to take severe measures today to stop disasters from happening in the future.

They suggest halting and then reversing the situation by eliminating our dependence on oil and coal and embracing ‘clean energy’ such as wind, solar, tidal power; finding an alternative to using oil derivatives for transportation; and most controversially, heavily taxing users of ‘dirty energy’ to force them to switch over to ‘cleaner’ alternatives.

As the biggest users of ‘dirty energy’ the western nations would be exposed to the full impact of these severe impositions.

The Idealists, on the other hand, want more concrete evidence of this forecast change

The ‘No’ case believes that more credible evidence is needed and collected over a longer period of time, before any definitive conclusion can be determined. They consider that statistically the 50 years period that the Scaremongers quote is nowhere near enough time to establish a long-term trend in the world’s temperatures, taking into account that the age of the earth being 4.5 billion years. They point to the changes, both ups and downs, of the earth’s temperature during its recent history. They also suggest that if a period of climate change is starting then it’s part of a cycle that’s been seen to occur periodically in the past.

The ‘No’ case says that the relationship between possible rising temperatures and man’s industrial activity is at best nothing more than an unproven theory. They suggest that much more concrete evidence than what’s been presented so far is needed, and as the Scaremongers have been pushing this theory for at least 10 years without producing further evidence, then it’s still a theory.

Some people even suggest that the Scaremongers are inciting public opinion to advance their political ambitions

However, many of the Idealists agree that a switch to cleaner and renewable energy resources would be beneficial for mankind in the long term, but that the measures put forward by the ‘Yes’ people go too far. Generally, the Idealists agree with the need to find alternate means of energy for when the present sources of fossil fuels - coal, natural gas, oil, uranium - expire, and to get away from suppliers in politically sensitive areas.

The ‘No’ people suggest that as there is a very slim chance of the Scaremongers being proved correct, other world-wide problems should be tackled first and given a greater degree of emphasis than is the present case. Here the Idealists are referring to major issues of world-wide poverty; the ever-increasing gap between the rich and the poor countries; the decline in health services to poorer countries; the deterioration in the quality of political governance in Africa; threats of religious confrontation; as well as the many regionalized issues that have been a source of continuous friction between nations for decades.

This is the first part of an attempt to put some balance into the ongoing international controversy that is the theory of man-made climate change.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as a look at one of the best fat burners and the increasing popularity of the Dish Network television service.

African American Military Heroes

Today the United States military branches treat African American soldiers with the respect they deserve but it wasn’t always so. In the past during the American Revolution and the Civil War, men of color were slaves and though they may have served the U.S., they were not accorded the same respect as their white masters.

It is a different landscape today as many African American men and women join the military not only to serve their country but to gain an education and experience that they otherwise would not have access to. Let’s look back at some of the notable African Americans that served in the past with distinction.

The American Revolution

Paul Cuffe aided in the war effort during the American Revolution by smuggling necessary goods past patrol ships of England. After he served his country and America had won her freedom he built a large shipping and whaling business of some success. He is often referred to by historians as “the father of black nationalism” in the U.S.

Though every schoolchild hears the story of the Boston Massacre one man is often left out. Crispus Attucks was the leader of the revolt against the troops of Great Britain in 1770. His alleged words “Don’t be afraid!” spurred the protesting crowd to rise up against the weapon wielding British soldiers.

The minutemen were responsible for rallying troops when British invaders were immanent in a region. Lemuel Haynes was one of those minutemen and he fought at both Fort Ticonderoga and the siege of Boston. When the war ended he went on to study Latin and Greek and eventually became a minister in the Congregationalist church.

African Americans in the Civil War through the Latter Part of the 19th Century

African Americans served in both the Union and Confederate armies during the “War Between the States.” Many served with distinction even as they fought alongside their slave masters. Even in the North where they were considered free, they did not receive the same treatment as their white counterparts.

Martin Robinson Delany achieved the highest rank of any other black soldier during the Civil War. He was a field commander and a recruiter of black soldiers and was discharged from the Union army with the rank of major. When the war was over he went to Harvard Medical School, worked in the field of real estate and was the author of a few books.

West Point was not known for their black cadets but Henry O. Flipper was the first African American to graduate from the academy in 1877. Because of charges that were falsely brought against him he was discharged from the army dishonorably which later in 1976 was changed to an honorable discharge. His family was pleased when in 1999 Flipper was granted a full pardon posthumously.

Though many history books don’t mention these African Americans and many more like them, they served honorably in the military to fight for American freedom even as their own freedom was often in question.

Discover quality military knives by CRKT and others at http://www.thompsonoutdoors.com

The Economic Tsunami We Aren’t Talking About

Well, it look likes the folks in the Federal Reserve have pulled it off. Money is once again flooding the markets, and the Dow Jones is responding. The Pound Sterling has fallen in value against the dollar, as has the Euro. All is right with the world.

Or is it? Britain is currently experiencing these hardships because they are a relatively small country compared to the USA. They are also a major financial center that was heavily invested in Credit Default Swaps. The same goes for all the other small, European nations. Internationally, this crisis is like a rock dropped in a pond: The smaller the pond, the faster the ripples reach the edges. While these companies are currently experiencing severe devaluations on their currencies, their decline will be short lived. Both the Pound Sterling and the Euro will make a return to their pre-crisis levels. These countries will also recover more quickly, and adapt in a faster manner.

This cannot be said of the US economy. You’re looking at one of the biggest bodies of water on the face of the earth. The “rock-in-a-pond” metaphor doesn’t work here. We’re looking at a growing economic tsunami, that will only grow in force and size as we move along. While it may take a little longer to hit, when it does, the effects will be felt long term. The US Dollar will be permanently devalued, and the nation as a whole may not recover for a few decades.

“But we’re not in crisis anymore, the Dollar looks strong. It’s the last one standing. All these other currencies are sinking.” I can hear you saying that right now, even as I am typing. You would be wrong. There are a few reasons why we are still in the woods, and most of them have not yet been broadcast to the public at large.

What are they? Let me put forth a scenario, and then see the conclusion that it naturally leads you to. You are not a sub-prime borrower. You received a reasonably good deal on your loan, and you are the member of a healthy, two-earner household. There are two cars that you are making payments on. You also have $10,000 in credit card debt. You are only making your minimum credit card payments. Then something happens….a flat tire, an unexpected dental filling. This leaves the mortgage short. What do you do with the excess? Credit Card. An ill-advised shopping spree. Credit Card. Your credit card is now maxed out. The mortgage is now due. You are late on the CC payment. The interest rate jumps. Your minimums are now higher than you can afford. What do you pay, the mortgage or the credit card bills? You default on the card, because you can’t afford to lose the home or the car.

This is not a great exaggeration of what America finds itself on the brink of right this very minute. People living above their means, without savings, and very little room for error. The Credit Card companies (who also happen to be banks) will be looking at over 118 billion in defaults by the end of the year, and this is only the beginning of the crisis.

In addition, it has now come to light that the Credit Default swaps were not just limited to the home mortgage industry. It seems GMAC(the financing arm for General Motors) and Ford Motor company made up CDS’ for their industries as well. It’s been a rough quarter for the automotive industry as well. Their current customers can’t afford the current payments, which is keeping them from trading in on a newer model. They are struggling to convert their truck and SUV lines into manufacturing for smaller, more fuel efficient cars. In the meantime, they will most likely be taking losses to get rid of their current inventories of trucks and SUV’s. The government has already loaned them $25 Billion to keep them afloat, and it is unclear as to whether or not that will keep the Big 3 solvent. There is most likely another bailout on the way.

Now, with our (up ’til recently) most venerable institutions falling on a regular basis, and people’s 401k’s following suit, everyone is fleeing to government issued treasury bonds. This is where the biggest wave has yet to hit, mainly because of how bonds have been marketed. Our financial advisors have always told us that these were the least risky of any type of investment that could be made. We’ve always been sold on the fact that they were backed up by the US Government, and the government always pays. That was true several years ago, but is not true anymore. Bonds pay out a certain percent per month, week, year, or period of years. Once they mature, you take them out without penalty. You might pay $50 for a bond that would be worth $100 when it hits maturity in 12 years. This works fine, as long as inflation does not outpace the interest being paid on your cash.

Guess what happened? The Fed has now made sure that the bonds you were issued will now be worth far less in the near future. Why? Because they just pumped $700 Billion (some reports say up to $5 trillion) into the economy. Do the math. They manufactured that money from thin air. Now, the current bonds you have in a long term position will have, optimistically, double digit negative growth. People who chose “low risk” on their 401K, and then forgot about it, will wake up with nothing in their accounts. “Low risk” does not equal “no risk”, but that is how it is presented. The Federal Government will have no choice, given current conditions, but to default on their obligations, or print even more money to pay back their debt. Why? Because this is the way we get foreign regimes to finance our national debt, in the Trillions of dollars.

Sooo…we either make China(and the rest of the world) mad….or we print more money. This will create hyper-inflation such as the world has never seen, and an economic tsunami that will cause even deeper pain internationally, as their USD slowly inches closer to the currency equivalent of bonfire fuel.

What is the solution? Well, you either buy gold, silver, land, or other stable assets, or you lose you shirt(and whatever valuation your paper currency has). Pay off your debts, live within your means. In doing so, you may not come out of this any richer, but you can at least keep what you have, and weather the biggest wave we’ve yet to see.

Kurt Hartman is Head of Employee Training at Mobile Fleet Service, Inc, and wishes he had extra money to invest in gold right now. His company sells mining tires and otr tires for the construction and mineral industries.

Volcanoes – Island Builders, Mountain Builders, And Time Bombs

The Hawaiian Islands would not be here today if it were not for the volcanoes of the mid-Pacific. There would be no Kauai, no Lanai, no Molokai, no Oahu, no Maui, and no Big Island. They were all formed by shield volcanoes fed by a constant flow of magma from a superheated pocket in the lower mantle called a hotspot.

Shield volcanoes fueled by hotspots are different from the stratovolcanoes of the Pacific Rim. The magma pouring into shield volcanoes is mainly basalt, lighter and less viscous than the silica-based magma fueling the Pacific Rim volcanoes produced by the collision of tectonic plates.

The hotspot theory might well be demonstrated by the way in which the Hawaiian Islands were formed. The theory suggests that there is an area in the mid-Pacific hundreds of miles below the ocean floor in the earth’s mantle, called The Hawaiian Hotspot. The hotspot size is estimated at 50 miles in diameter. The temperature in the hotspot is higher than that of the surrounding mantle. This intense heat melts the material from the lower part of the overriding tectonic plate and converts it into magma. The hotspot magma is lighter than the material in the rest of the mantle and rises to the earth’s crust in a narrow stream called a mantle plume. The mantle plume brings magma up to the ocean floor, and a volcanic cone begins to build.

Over time, repeated eruptions produce more and more lava that continue to build the cone higher and higher, until it finally emerges above the surface of the ocean as an island many thousands of years later.

The tectonic plate on which the new Hawaiian island sits is called the Pacific Plate. The Pacific Plate moves over the stationary hotspot in a northwesterly direction at about 1 inch per year. Moving at that rate, it takes several million years for the island to clear the hotspot. Island building progresses during this long period of time, and large islands with tall volcanic mountains are created, as is the case with the island of Maui with its 10,000 ft. Haleakala volcano, and the Big Island of Hawaii with its chain of volcanoes in 13,700 ft. Mauna Kea, 13,600 ft. Mauna Loa, and currently active Kilauea.

Once the moving plate carries an island away from the hotspot plume, the volcanoes on that island go dormant and start to erode, and the plume proceeds to build the next island. Niihau and Kauai, the easternmost islands of the Hawaiian chain, were the first to be built up from the hotspot activity. The Pacific Plate continued its northwesterly movement over the hotspot and the islands of Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, and Maui were created in succession. The last island over the hotspot is the still volcanically active Big Island of Hawaii.

Just a few miles off the Big Island, a new island is starting to build. It is called Loihi, and has pushed up two miles from the ocean floor, but is still a mile beneath the surface of the ocean. It is estimated that Loihi will appear above the ocean surface in 220,000 years.

One source suggests there are 50 active hotspots throughout the world. Some, such as the Hawaiian Hotspot, lie under oceanic plates, and others under continental plates. Among the volcanic islands created by oceanic hotspots are Iceland, the Azores, the Galapagos, Samoa, the Marquesas Islands, the Society Islands, and Reunion.

The best example of continental plate hotspot activity is Yellowstone National Park. The heart of the park is an active caldera that powers hot springs, fumaroles, mud pots, and geysers such as Old Faithful. The thermal energy derives from a large hotspot underlying the caldera. This same hotspot has produced many other caldera and lava bed areas throughout the western states, as the North American Plate moves southwesterly. The Yellowstone caldera was created by a massive volcanic eruption 600,000 years ago.

In recent years, a number of scientists have challenged the idea of a stationary hotspot and of a mantle plume being the source of hotspot magma. Several other explanations have been put forth. Since hotspots are located deep in the earth’s mantle, no one has ever seen one. Their existence and the way they work can only be assumed.

In contrast to hotspot island building, the big mountain ranges of the Pacific Rim, such as the Cascades in North America and the Andes in South America, were formed by stratovolcanic action, earthquakes, and uplifting of the continental plate boundaries. Earthquakes, stratovolcanoes, and uplifting are products of a process called subduction, in which the oceanic plate slides under, or subducts, the continental plate.

Stratovolcanoes tend to erupt less frequently but far more violently than hotspot volcanoes. Subduction produces magma rich in silica. This heavy and sticky material seals the heat and gasses inside the volcano and permits the pressure to build up over hundreds of years until it finally erupts, sometimes in a devastating blast.

Uplifting can be caused by the fault slippage that produces earthquakes and frees the continental plate to rise, and by the compression of one tectonic plate pushing against another. For millions of years, along the west coast of the U.S., the Pacific Plate has not only been sliding under the North American Plate, but also pressing against it. The compression has been a factor in the uplifting process.

Although most spectacular volcanic blowouts are produced by stratovolcanoes, there have also been some historic hotspot volcano blasts. The Kilauea volcano on the Big Island of Hawaii had a major blowout in 1790 that killed 80 people.

Any active volcano can be considered a time bomb. There are warning signs such as swarms of tremors that sometimes precede eruptions, but no one really knows in advance exactly when a volcano will blow or how big the eruption will be.

Gordon Gumpertz, author of TSUNAMI, is a working novelist who writes suspense-packed adventure novels featuring believable characters caught up in the dynamic forces of natural and man-made disasters. His books achieve a sense of immediacy and realism through extensive background research. For more, visit Tsunami.

Tsunami: One of Nature’s Most Destructive Forces

In preparing to write my novel Tsunami, about a fictional undersea volcano on the verge of exploding and sending a monster tsunami smashing into California, I did a great deal of research into the world of natural disasters. I leaned heavily on NOAA, USGS, NASA and dozens of library and university sources for my information. One thing became clear as I dug into the research: tsunamis are not self generating. They are always the product of some other natural event.

Tsunamis are triggered by disturbances on the ocean floor that displace water and upset the equilibrium of the surrounding ocean. Undersea earthquakes, landslides, and erupting volcanoes are the main causes. In deep water, the height of a tsunami wave may be less than 4 feet and hardly noticeable on the surface where normal swells are that large or larger, but the wave length, or the trough between waves in a tsunami train, can be 50 miles or more. Once a tsunami is propagated, the long wave travels at 500 to 600 miles per hour. As the wave nears land and the water shallows, the leading edge slows down and the trailing wave closes the gap and compresses the water into a wave that can build to a height of 100 feet or more as it sweeps ashore. The destructive power of a large tsunami hitting the shoreline is hard to imagine.

Recorded history’s most destructive tsunami occurred on Dec. 26, 2004 in the Indian Ocean. A 9.1 magnitude undersea earthquake off the island of Sumatra created a massive tsunami. Waves 30 to 100 feet high struck Indonesia, Thailand, India, and eight other countries. 225,000 died.

Following the explosion of the Krakatau volcano in 1883, 130-foot waves wiped out whole villages along the coast of Sumatra, killing more than 36,000 people.

A tsunami can travel long distances without significant loss of energy. In 1960, a tsunami started by a 9.5 seafloor earthquake off Chile battered the Chilean coast and then travelled undetected thousands of miles across the Pacific Ocean, causing death and destruction in Hawaii, Japan, Alaska, and countries as far away as New Zealand.

In 1896, a deep submarine earthquake 200 miles east of Japan triggered a tsunami that sped unobserved toward land, quickly rising to 110 feet as it charged ashore. The fast-moving wave smashed into the village of Sanriku during a Shinto festival that had attracted thousands of people. The tsunami obliterated the village and killed 27,000. The wave had passed undetected under the keels of the fishing boats 20 miles offshore.

In Hilo, Hawaii, in 1946, the harbor, waterfront, and downtown area were destroyed by a 30-foot tsunami, and 159 people died.

Following the 1946 and 1960 tsunamis that devastated Hilo, Hawaii, Japan, and other countries around the Pacific Basin, 26 countries throughout the Pacific region collaborated in the installation of the Pacific Tsunami Warning System. Seafloor seismometers and tidal gauges were installed throughout the Pacific and connected to the System’s operational headquarters in Ewa Beach, near Honolulu. Real time instrument readings locate the place and time of an undersea disturbance capable of starting a tsunami. Immediate warnings are issued to the areas of potential danger. The U.S. West Coast is protected by the West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning System headquartered in Palmer, Alaska. Unfortunately, no warning system was installed in the Indian Ocean prior to the December, 2004 tsunami that killed over 200,000 people. None of the countries bordering the Indian Ocean had advance warning of the approaching tsunami.

Even with a warning system in place, tsunamis can still take lives if triggered by undersea disturbances close to shore. In 1992 and 1993 over 2,000 people were killed by tsunamis in Nicaragua, Indonesia, and Japan. In 1998 a series of 50-foot waves caused by an undersea landslide only a few miles offshore washed over a small island near Papua, New Guinea, denuding the island and taking 2,200 lives. The first wave struck within minutes of the undersea event, giving the islanders no chance to prepare.

A tsunami is usually made up of more than one wave. A train of two, three, or four waves can strike land at intervals of 10 to 30 minutes or longer. The first wave is usually not the largest. The second or third wave is often the biggest and most destructive.

Very little is left standing after a large tsunami sweeps ashore. The wave’s power smashes buildings, uproots trees, and sucks everything back out to sea when it recedes. The scene is one of complete devastation. If you live near the ocean, take tsunami warnings seriously. Head inland as directed by local authorities. Do not go to the beach to see what a tsunami looks like. By the time you find out, it will be too late.

Gordon Gumpertz, author of TSUNAMI, is a working novelist who writes suspense-packed adventure novels featuring believable characters caught up in the dynamic forces of natural and man-made disasters. His books achieve a sense of immediacy and realism through extensive background research. For more, visit Tsunami.

Russia on the Rise?

While those of us in the US have been distracted with primaries, a general election, and a huge economic crisis, Russia’s been making some moves that are raising flags and eyebrows in the intelligence community. While some people actively scoff when a new cold war is mentioned, the concept is not really that far-fetched. If you don’t believe me, let me explain what they have been up to over the past year.

George Bush always claimed to have a sense of Vladimir Putin’s soul. What he has always failed to understand is that Putin’s heart belongs with the former Communist regime. Putin is a pragmatist, and as such, made “friends” with leaders that would leave him alone, while he pursued the rebuilding of Russia as a military and economic superpower. Once his goals are accomplished, the advice of his more democratically minded “friends” will go unheeded. In fact, it has already taken place.

So what has Mr. Putin been up to? He’s been yucking it up with some of America’s most hated enemies. He’s helping Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran build his first nuclear power plant, along with supplying arms to aid their military. He just signed oil, gas, and nuclear power pact with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. It was Mr. Chavez who recently argued that the USA should ditch their constitution, and draw up a new one based upon Communist principles.

By docking their destroyer “Peter the Great” in the port of Tartus, Syria, Russia has signaled that they are reengaging in the Middle East, and could have a significant impact on peace negotiations(or lack thereof) between Israel and its neighbors. That’s not the only overture they’ve made, however.

Russia has signed arms pacts, and done deals with the following nations over the past year, in full view of the public: Libya, Sudan, Turkey, Algeria, Syria, and several other Middle-Eastern/African nations. Putin has made it clear where his strategic alliances lie, and where his bets on the future are placed. Remember, these are just the public alliances, they don’t include shadowy deals done at midnight by a pier, and as a former member of the KGB, Putin has made plenty of this type of deal as well.

Russia also continues to do arms deals with China. Russia and China are just Siamese twins, two bodies that share the same heart. Neither of them particularly like being told what to do by the UN, much less the USA. They have both taken a more nuanced approach in the diplomatic arena, by ignoring criticisms of political opponents, and focusing on accomplishments that are more palatable to their accusers. Capitalism has kept China from having to answer on human rights violations. Capitalism has kept Putin from having to answer charges of a state-controlled/supported religious system, and the fact that he has a puppet-democracy. That’s also how he managed to skate by on the invasion of Georgia, by-the-by.

So what exactly is going on with Russia? In business terms, they call it “restructuring for the purposes of emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy”. In political terms, it’s called the resurrection of a Soviet Union. The goal is to bring glory and power back to Mother Russia.

So far, Putin has succeeded. The question is, how long before the West raises an objection? My guess is, when they finally do, it will be too late for the rest of the world.

Kurt Hartman is a International Political Junkie. While he loves ruminating on foreign policy, his day job is Head of Web Development for Mobile Fleet Service. They sell OTR Tires , of the type used by heavy equipment, on six of seven continents. Go figure.

Next Page »