The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for December 6th, 2010

Top Scientist Resigns from American Physical Society: says global warming is a scam – scientists corrupted by big money

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Here we go ….. and be sure to read every delicious word.

RWB News As reported by the Gateway Pundit:  Top US scientist Hal Lewis resigned this week from his post at the University of California at Santa Barbara.  He admitted global warming climate change was nothing but a scam in his resignation letter.

From the UK Telegraph (What! No American elite media coverage?):

Professor Emiritus Hal Lewis Resigns from American Physical Society

The following is a letter to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emiritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis

From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society

6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.


Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)

Posted in Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Twas the night before a nondenominational winter holiday…..

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

San Francisco Fed – Jobs created by stimulus is statistically zero

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Via Reason Magazine

The folks at e21 point out a new study by Daniel J. Wilson of the San Francisco Fed on the effects of the stimulus :

Wilson’s study makes an important contribution to this debate by focusing on state-by-state comparisons. A large portion of stimulus funding at the state level was based on criteria that were entirely independent of the economic situation that states faced. For example, the number of existing highway miles was used to calculate additional transportation spending.

The study uses this resulting variation in state-level stimulus funding to determine what impact ARRA funding had on employment — including both the direct impact of workers hired to complete planned projects, as well as any broader spillover effects resulting from greater government spending. Administration economists have repeatedly emphasized the importance of this indirect employment growth in driving economic recovery.

The results suggest that though the program did result in 2 million jobs “created or saved” by March 2010, net job creation was statistically indistinguishable from zero by August of this year. Taken at face value, this would suggest that the stimulus program (with an overall cost of $814 billion) worked only to generate temporary jobs at a cost of over $400,000 per worker. Even if the stimulus had in fact generated this level of employment as a durable outcome, it would still have been an extremely expensive way to generate employment.

Next time that Democrats tell you that ObamaCare will make the cost of health care cheaper, in spite of adding millions of people to government programs, because of “inherent efficiencies” in the government bureaucratic system, remember this.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Government Gone Wild, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Chronicle of Higher Ed publishes hate screed against Senator Jim DeMint

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Remember the constant theme we repeat at this web site. College administrators are paid six figure salaries to exercise good judgment. While the people at the Chronicle are not technically college administrators, they are certainly a part of that peer group.

Here is a sample…

Chronicle of Higher Ed with writer Laurie Essig:

But God, I need more.  I need You to smite this character Jim DeMint (R-SC).  There are a lot of people praying to You to help DeMint spread his hate.  In fact, according to the Family Research Council (FRC), they’ve organized tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people to pray to You for DeMint’s success.

That’s why I’m hoping You’ll listen to this one prayer and smite this man.  I’m not asking for much.  Just a little gay scandal.  Perhaps he could be caught with another man like Rekers?  Or maybe a mistress like South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford?  Or a very expensive sex worker like Eliot Spitzer?


The comments on the article… well:

t_paine – November 14, 2010 at 6:53 pm

Laurie Essig

The light humor thing doesn’t work so well for you because too much of the bitter leaks through. You and god know right and wrong?

You are a pretty good hater yourself. Don’t be modest.

notsurprised – November 14, 2010 at 7:56 pm

Is this sort of material really what the Chronicle aspires to publish? I thought this was a journal of serious thought and discussion…

mainiac – November 15, 2010 at 5:58 am

Essig needs serious counseling, and fast.

cmsmw – November 15, 2010 at 7:02 am

I’m generally in agreement with Dr. Essig on this issue, but this was not the Chronicle’s finest moment.

rab60 – November 15, 2010 at 7:33 am

I don’t care for Jim DeMint’s politics either, but this article is pathetic and should never have passed the Editor’s desk.

jffoster – November 15, 2010 at 8:00 am

tattletale_.. (2 above), the CHE deserves criticism because it doesnt publish just any opinion column that comes along. It is selective, has “hired” Professor Essing to do these, and as another commenter notices, the attempt at humor doesn’t work here because “the bitterness comes through”. So does the incoherence.

I don’t think, at least I hope, she’s not typical of the faculty of The College on the Hill. Maybe a good whack with Gamaliel Painter’s cane would help.

blog21 – November 15, 2010 at 8:07 am

This one and the “I want my students to fail” article have really set the tone for my Monday. How much more dripping cynicism can I handle before 8am?

mindnbodybuilding – November 15, 2010 at 8:22 am

Laurie Essig

Did you think you were being clever? It didn’t work.

nuffsed – November 15, 2010 at 8:35 am

Liberals are the real purveyors of hate. This is low. This is right down there in the gutter with Wanda Sykes wishing that Rush Limbaugh’s kidney’s would fail. Why would you wish ill on someone just because you don’t like their politics? And worse drag God into it? The worst thing I have ever wished on someone is that they would lose an election, get recalled, or impeached.

Matthew 7:5

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Professor to Students: ‘Blood Will be on Your Hands’ if You Don’t Fight Global Warming

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

And they let thus nut job have access to your kids folks….

College administrators are paid six figure incomes to have good judgment…


Longer version –

The heat wave that he talks about in Europe, it wasn’t as bad as he states but there were thousands of deaths, of course the government run health care system could not deal with the load from a hot summer, yet any bets that this clown supports a government take over of health care? I like the farming scare he uses about cutting down Brazilian raid forests to have farm land. As technology improves history has shown that we grow more with less.

“What about the 40,000 people killed in Europe because of YOUR decision”  – wow…. this professor couldn’t win a Lincoln-Douglas style debate to save his career.

Posted in Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

More Hadley Center Global Warming Horror Claims Debunked by Real Science

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Yet another horrifying claim by global warming alarmist PhD’s debunked by real science. Reporting of the real science by the UK Guardian. Notice how American press wont cover this stuff?


The Global Warming Alarmist Claim:

Last year [2009], researchers at the Met Office Hadley Centre reported that a 2C rise above pre-industrial levels, widely considered the best-case scenario, would still see 20-40% of the Amazon die off within 100 years. A 3C rise would see 75% of the forest destroyed by drought in the next century, while a 4C rise would kill 85%.


OMG the horror of it all:

According to a study of ancient rainforests, trees may be hardier than previously thought. Carlos Jaramillo, a scientist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI), examined pollen from ancient plants trapped in rocks in Colombia and Venezuela. “There are many climactic models today suggesting that … if the temperature increases in the tropics by a couple of degrees, most of the forest is going to be extinct,” he said. “What we found was the opposite to what we were expecting: we didn’t find any extinction event [in plants] associated with the increase in temperature, we didn’t find that the precipitation decreased.”

In a study published todayin Science, Jaramillo and his team studied pollen grains and other biological indicators of plant life embedded in rocks formed around 56m years ago, during an abrupt period of warming called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum. CO2 levels had doubled in 10,000 years and the world was warmer by 3C-5C for 200,000 years.

Contrary to expectations, he found that forests bloomed with diversity. New species of plants, including those from the passionflower and chocolate families, evolved quicker as others became extinct. The study also shows moisture levels did not decrease significantly during the warm period. “It was totally unexpected,” Jaramillo said of the findings.


It gets better:

Jaramillo found that the plants he studied seemed to become more efficient with their water use when it became more scarce….. “What the fossil record is showing is that plants have already the genetic variability to cope with high temperature and high levels of CO2.


Another one bites the dust…

Posted in 2012, Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

MEP Daniel Hannan Comparison Between US And Europe

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Daniel Hannan is a Member of the European Parliament

“If you look at the policies being pursued by your current rulers they amount to a comprehensive strategy towards Europeanization. This is a sustained attempt to change the  character of The Republic into something else.

I am living in your future and believe me you are not going to like it. “

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Students for Liberty Growing on Campus

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Libertarianism has merits. The only thing that bothers me about SOME Libertarians is that SOME do not see that freedom without personal restraint leads to the very tyranny they oppose.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

CNN: More Minority Familes Home Schooling

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

This is no surprise. As inner city schools continue to fail and as long as the NAACP and other such organizations that have been taken over by the far left have sided with the government union and the status-quo, more and more black families are taking this option as a solution.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

ClimateGate One Year Later. Elite Media Still Lying

Posted by iusbvision on December 6, 2010

Be sure to see our Alarmism category for more news.

One Year Ago:

December 9, 2009 Fox & Friends talks Cheney, Palin, ClimateGate and the EPA study linked at the top of the “related” section below.

Russia Today and much of the foreign press had a feeding frenzy on this story:


EPA Tried to Supress Global Warming Report Admitting Skeptics Correct

Global warming scientists hacked emails show manipulation of data, hiding of other data and conspiring to attack/smear global warming skeptics!

National Association of Scholars on the “ClimateGate” Scandal

Examples of the “Climategate” Documents – UPDATE: BBC Had the emails and files for 6 weeks, sat on story. UPDATE II – They carried out their conspiracy threat; much of the raw data from CRU destroyed!

Climategate II: Uh, oh – raw data in New Zealand tells a different story than the “official” one.

Two short lectures on some of the data that the “Climategate” scientists tried to hide and fraud.

The Roundup: IPCC Authors Now Admitting Fault – No Warming Since 1995 – Sea Levels Not Rising. – Senator Inhofe: Possible criminal misuse of taxpayer research funds.

UN IPCC Co-chair: climate policy is redistributing the world’s wealth

Global Warming Alarmism is About Achieving Central Control of the Economy and Now They Admit It Openly.

IPCC Author: Expect 30 Years of Global Cooling

OOPS AGAIN: IPCC scientists screeching about the cataclysmic effects of sea-level rises forgot to consider sedimentary deposits…

NOAA Claim: Warmest June Ever – But They Made Up Much of the Data!

Bjorn Lomborg: Government Plans to Stop Global Warming Won’t Work

Scientific American thinks you are stupid. The dissection of a blatant propaganda piece for global warming alarmism.

Trump: You can’t have a good economy with $80 oil – China is laughing at our stupidity – Global Warming a “Con”

New AP Article on “Global Cooling Myth” Spins a Bad Study – UPDATED: Look where they put THIS ground station…

Al Gore: Climate change issue can lead to world government

Arctic sea ice now 28.7% higher than this date last year – still rallying

Posted in Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »