mtpolitics.net

That Big Nuclear Power Plant Up There In The Sky?

It had its first spotless month in a century. (Would that be considered “sun-o-pause”? –Ed.)

There are climatologists who now posit that sunspot activity has more of an effect on climate than anything Man has (or could) do.

So, the next few years could be interesting. Are we headed toward a heat disaster, as the Cult of Gaia would have us believe, or could we be in for a repeat of the Maunder Minimum?

When it comes to food supplies, etc., the latter scenario is far more problematic than the former, if you ask me. Which you didn’t, but I’m telling you anyway.

Because that’s what sad little lonely geeks like me do, in our own little universes. (Sorry — couldn’t resist.)

Posted in Global Warming | 1 Comment »

Two minutes, by yourself, you know and you feel shame, you know. And then you get free.

Been cranky for a while, if you haven’t noticed.

Hell, I’ve even admitted it:

[C]omments lately generate more heat than light, as it were, and to be fair, I’m as much at fault as anyone.

Some time off, and some introspection have certainly helped my state of mind; nefarious overtones to the contrary, and I’ve regained my sense of humor.

Anyway, during my self-imposed timeout, I had a chance to experience a blog without comments, and I found it to be boring, so those are back on.

Lotsa stuff to talk about in the days and months ahead, dont’cha think?

Should be a good time.

Posted in Montana | 13 Comments »

The Left on Energy? Clueless.

There’s an old saw about American politics: Keep Democrats out of the boardroom and Republicans out of the bedroom.

I’d like to add a third option to that one. “Keep Liberal Arts majors out of energy policy.”

No, really. Leave it to people who actually understand it, can do the math, and understand what’s involved.

The left seems to believe in some sort of fantasy that an artificial shortage of petroleum will drive us to use alternatives. They love, love, love the high gas prices, though you’d never hear them admit it. (Except for the Sierra Club. Kudos to them for admitting it. Would that their fellow travelers be as honest.)

They look at some guy who builds an off-grid house and say, “See. It can be done,” but they never seem to think about the problem of scale. Our nation uses a lot of energy. A lot.

Some of you may remember Steven Den Beste from his old blog, USS Clueless. He recently made a brief return to his engineering-oriented writing, and talked a little bit about some of the alternatives, and where they stand today.

He writes:

I don’t blog about that kind of thing anymore. I never enjoyed blogging about energy, anyway, because for too many people “alternate energy” is more about religion than about physics. They believe that if we are just creative enough, we can overcome fundamental physical limitations — and it’s not that easy.

In order for “alternate energy” to become feasible, it has to satisfy all of the following criteria:

1. It has to be huge (in terms of both energy and power)
2. It has to be reliable (not intermittent or unschedulable)
3. It has to be concentrated (not diffuse)
4. It has to be possible to utilize it efficiently
5. The capital investment and operating cost to utilize it has to be comparable to existing energy sources (per gigawatt, and per terajoule).

If it fails to satisfy any of those, then it can’t scale enough to make any difference. Solar power fails #3, and currently it also fails #5. (It also partially fails #2, but there are ways to work around that.)

That post is worth a read, as are two of his earlier pieces on alternative energy.

• More Practical Problems
• Obscure Energy Sources

For the record, and for what it’s worth, I think we do need to develop alternatives, but until we find something that can actually scale enough to make a difference, we need to use what’s available. Doing otherwise is cutting off our nose to spite our face.

[UPDATE]: I guess liberal arts majors fail at reading comprehension, too. Either that, or he’s deliberately misrepresenting my position. How can someone read this as a “silver bullet against alternative energy,” when you need only read the paragraph above to see the words, “I think we do need to develop alternatives?” And further, how does a degree in engineering followed long career in engineering make someone a “self-proclaimed” engineer?

Oh, and a note for the president of the Craig Sprout Fan Club (really, this man crush you have on me is kind of embarrassing), if there were only some way to respond to a post, other than in the comments, that would show up underneath the main post, then people could see that link and click on it and read a response at another site. Maybe someone should get to work on that, huh? They could call it . . . trackback . . . or maybe pingback . . .

Yeah, that’s the ticket. Someone should do that.

Posted in Dextra, Greenies, Wacky Left | 3 Comments »

Another Insurance Scenario For You

This one is semi-hypothetical. That is to say, the particulars have been obfuscated, but the situation is essentially as written.

There is a family who has a child with an obvious impairment. She was missing developmental milestones by the age of two, and by three she was seeing specialists, and attending a special preschool. At every turn, the diagnosis was the same: “We don’t know. She’s a puzzle.”

The question was raised. Perhaps the professional could act in an advisory capacity? Unfortunately, he couldn’t, due to the narrow definition of the condition, and of his professional obligations. Besides, he lamented, how could anyone afford what he needed to charge without insurance? And what insurance company would pay for someone to be a “consultant?” No, all things considered, there really wasn’t much to do, but continue with the treatment that the insurance would cover, and hope that the inexperienced professional could figure things out on her own.

Now what do you think would best serve the patient and all involved?

I’ve said it before, and I’ll keep on saying it. Insurance isn’t the solution. Insurance is the problem.

Posted in Montana | No Comments »

In Which I Agree With The Chairman of the Montana Democratic Party

“I resent pretend cowboys, including the bushwhacker from Crawford, Texas (President George W. Bush), the goat herder from Billings (Republican U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg) and the disk jockey from the Northern Ag Network (Republican state Senate candidate Taylor Brown),” he [former trial lawyer and MT Democratic Party Chairman --Ed.] said.

Yes, I resent pretend cowboys, too!

By the by, since we’re talking about the Democratic convention, did you catch the news about how Republicans were trying to gain entrance to the convention so that they could make a stink with video recordings?

You didn’t?

Oh, yeah, that’s because it was the Democrats who did that to the Republicans.

Was there any wailing and gnashing of teeth about a possible quorom?

No, but really, that was because only 12 legislators showed up.

Still and all, while this is funny (at least to me), I have a pretty strong hunch that the Democrats are going to clean the GOP’s clock this cycle. There are going to be a few exceptions, of course, but by and large, I think it’s going into the “D” column this year.

Posted in Montana | No Comments »

Can We Just Admit That It’s Bullshit Now?

Carbon Dioxide?

Sure.

Methane?

Alright.

Sunspots?

Makes sense.

Compound Interest?

OK, now you’re just yanking my chain.

Posted in Montana | No Comments »

Global Warming Strikes Montana

Everybody Panic!!

So, the Clark Fork Coalition (an angelic non-profit) came up with this report that Global Warming is Very Real™, and a Huge Threat™, etc., etc.

Get this, though. They used 50 years of data to make their extrapolations.

50 years!! Out of 4 billion.

Unless I fat-fingered my calculator, in statistical terms, that is a sample of 0.00000125 percent. One millionth of one percent.

I’m no statistician, but that’s not a very good sample to extrapolate from.

You can find another study, that looks at more of the long term data and concludes, basically, there’s been nothing outside normal variations for quite some time.

The study does go on to detail some of the effects of proposed climate change legislation, and concludes, again, that Montanans will bear a high price, for no tangible gain.

You did read that report when it came out, didn’t you?

Oh, yeah, you didn’t hear anything about it.

Quelle surprise.

Finally, comes this tidbit about that “consensus” thing we hear so much about. While you’re over there, read this article, too.

Posted in Dextra, Global Warming, Greenies, Montana, Wacky Left | No Comments »

Cracks Me Right Up, It Does

Since our sinestra pals here in Montana spill so many electrons bitching about Max Baucus, I would think that they would be positively elated that a truly progressive candidate is in the race.

Too bad he has an “R” behind his name, huh?

I mean, here’s your chance to prove that you will truly vote principle over party, and you’ll likely squander it on the more conservative candidate.

It’s pretty funny, when you think about it.

Posted in Dextra, Montana, Wacky Left | No Comments »

Saith The Obamessiah

“You know, there’s a lot of talk in this country about anger. Well I think Americans are tired of the same old varmints. Ordinary Americans believe in capitalists, they want less predators, they just aren’t sure if their leaders believe in happiness.”

Not really, but this is pretty fun.

Posted in Montana | No Comments »

New Montana Political Blog

You can find a pro-Kelleher blog at Eyebrows Over Highbrows, if you haven’t already.

The kicker is the banner image of Kelleher’s famous eyebrows. It’s distinctive, yet a tad disturbing.

Enjoy!

Posted in Montana | No Comments »

Applying the Democrats’ Energy Thinking to More Mundane Matters

“Don’t save any money for your house now. You won’t be able to do anything for ten years, and we’ll probably have some alternative financial system by then, anyway.”

Posted in Montana | No Comments »

Denny Rehberg on Energy

I’m with him up until point #4.

Agree or disagree, he does make some good points.

Posted in Montana | 1 Comment »

Seeing As How This Is A .44 Magnum

The most powerful handgun in the world, and could blow your head clean off. You have to ask yourself one question. “Do I feel lucky?”

Well, do ya, punk?

(H/T: Jack Bog)

Posted in Humor | No Comments »

This Should Be Interesting

In Montana, if you do much traveling, you can’t help but be stricken by the poverty on our reservations. The reasons for which are myriad and debatable, but I’m heartened that on the Crow Reservation, they are going to try to do something about it.

With energy prices soaring, the poverty-stricken Crow want to tap the vast deposits underneath their 2 million acres of land. The tribe estimates that the ground contains 9 billion tons of extractable coal, or enough to meet the nation’s needs for almost a decade.

The question in my mind, is, “Will we let them?”

The answer in my mind, is, “Probably not.”

Posted in Global Warming, Greenies, Montana | No Comments »

We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident

Over this past Independence Day weekend, a number of bloggers across the spectrum posted the text of the Declaration of Independence.

Like most well-written and relevant pieces, I find something new in every reading, and I had some thoughts about it.

While I tried to bring them all together in a cohesive (for me) manner, I found that lefty journalist, par excellence, George Ochenski had already covered some of the same ground. (Simultaneous H/T’s: David Crisp, “Blue Jay” Stevens.

(As a side note, I propose the following terminology for our sinestra pals’ reaction to an Ochenski column: Ochenskigasm.)

Be that as it may, Ochenski does make some good points, but he’s really cherry-picking, which should come as no surprise.

Consider this quote from Sam Adams:

if ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

The leftist mindset of today leans greatly toward the “tranquility of servitude,” in the guise of all manner of regulatory and confiscatory programs all couched in the doublespeak of “the greater good.” (Think: Global warming, socialized medicine, ponzi retirement schemes, etc.)

OK, that one is beside the point, but I like it.

Back to the Declaration, though; let’s have a look at some of the other grievances in the Declaration; the ones the left wants to ignore:

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: Like kow-towing to the “global community?”

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: “Fair Trade” laws, anyone?

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: That’s kind of a convenient one to forget, wouldn’t you say?

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: Does anyone remember the 10th amendment? Anyone?

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. Is this ringing any bells? Bueller?

Let me say that I don’t necessarily disagree with the ones that Ochenski has chosen, and that we’re having an Ochenskigasm over. (Though the one about the judges cracks me up. Hopefully he has the same criticism of every president going back to Washington.) Most of the FISA and Patriot Act stuff is complete and utter bullshit, and should be an affront to anyone who values liberty. But, you can’t pick and choose what you want liberty to mean.

Either we’re a free country, or we’re not. I don’t believe we are now, and I don’t believe that many of the programs that the left wants to enact are going to make us any more free. Freedom is messy. It’s unsafe and it has no safety nets. The right of liberty burdens you with the responsibility of having to make your own way; not figure out a way to take money from your neighbor to satisfy your “needs,” or newly-invented “rights.”

In for a penny, you’re in for a pound. What’s it going to be, boys?

Ochenski and his fellow travelers would do well to remember one thing about revolutions.

They nearly always run Red.

Posted in Montana | 1 Comment »