Voici la question qui me guide dans mes recherches...

L’appât du gain manifesté par les entreprises supranationales et certains groupes oligarchiques, de même que le contrôle des ressources naturelles par ceux-ci, dirigent l’humanité vers un nouvel ordre mondial de type féodal, voir même sa perte. Confronté à cette situation, l’être humain est invité à refuser d’accepter d’emblée une pseudo-vérité véhiculée par des médias peut-être à la solde de ces entreprises et groupes. Au contraire, il est invité à s’engager dans un processus de discernement et conscientisation afin de créer sa propre vérité par la confrontation de sa réalité nécessairement subjective à des données objectives, telles que révélées par la science, par exemple.

The penalty that good men pay for not being interested in politics is to be governed by men worse than themselves. - Plato

mardi 27 octobre 2009

Statisticians reject global cooling?

In this latest article to it the news, you can read the statisticians reject global cooling.

So what other scientist are saying about this?

Roger A. Pielke, Sr. has a different perspective on this paper that you can read here.

The article (and apparently the NOAA study itself), therefore, suffers from a significant oversight since it does not comment on an update of the same upper ocean heat content data that Jim Hansen has used to assess global warming.


From my point of view, the global temperature will keep fluctuating, going up or down for multiple reasons as you can see in this graph. The important observation to see here is the relation between CO2 and temperature.

You can always find any trend in a graph depending on the start and end point.
The point is: Is there a good relation between CO2 and Temperature? All the talks, taxes, laws and other crazy things being put in place is supposed to be because CO2 will kill us all. Not because there is a trend somewhere in some data set. Someone somewhere will find this specific data set(s) the prove that the globe is warming or cooling. But what about CO2 and temperature?

mercredi 21 octobre 2009

I am a global warming skeptics, where is my money from big oil? I am waiting!

According to this PR executive James Hoggan, everybody who is a skeptic about climate change, global warming or anything about the climate is a "recipient of corporate funds" that protects the industry against regulation that could prevent climate change.... Listen to this:

But who his James Hoggan... Read this article to know more.

Like you can read on my blog, I debate the science, I am pro clean energy, I am for getting rid of fossil fuels ASAP and have no link whatsoever with any corporate entity. I am only here to protect the future of the human race.

Anyway, there is no or little links between green house gases produced by humans and climate changes. So all of this debate is for nothing... Only produces more CO2... So SHUT-UP.

mardi 20 octobre 2009

Video of the week... How nuclear energy works...

I wonder why we don't see those simple explanation anymore?

dimanche 18 octobre 2009

Two excellent video on climate change.

First : Climate chains

Climate Chains from Climate Chains on Vimeo.
An Epic debate is underway in our country. Proposed climate legislation would have a far-reaching impact on your standard of living and give government a portal into every aspect of our lives. The affordable, dependable and abundant energy upon which any great civilization is build is about to be rationed. Climate Chains is our effort to engage the culture, to petition a more reasoned approach to the intellectual debate that to often gets lost or overlooked in the irrational rush to pass climate legislation in an atmosphere of national and global panic. When you’ve built the greatest civilization in human history, fundamental changes in the economics of that system must be made with the most sober of consideration.



Second : Christopher Monckton Speaking at Bethel University Play the video, and use the arrow to change the slide of the presentation.

Power point (pdf) of the presentation:

Christopher Monckton Speaking at Bethel University

Video:

samedi 17 octobre 2009

How to simulate data and graphics that shows the world is warming

Here's a great analysis done in excel that shows how to recreate the infamous hokey stick that showed that world as warmed in the last century. Bottom line, when you eliminate data that does not fit your theory, your theory become "true". Here, they used random data created in excel, eliminated data sets that did not fit the warming and averaged the data that fitted the warming and by magic, it fits, remember, this is random data sets!. Click on the graph for more details.

I want to believe?

Are you one that believe in the paranormal, weird stuff, UFO and other things of that kind... Then this web site will be of some use to you... Well, if you dare to understand where those belief comes from that is.

There is also a test on that page that ask 10 questions to see how good a skeptic you are. My score was

You have scored 40 points! You are a: STRONG SCEPTIC You do not believe in anything that doesn't have scientific facts behind it. You believe that you have to experience something yourself in order to have faith in it, and as you haven't experienced any paranormal events you are a strict non-believer. You think that luck or fluke are at the heart of most 'supernatural events' and you believe the rest are complete fakes.

One good demonstration is this one:

jeudi 15 octobre 2009

New kind of robot locomotion - Jamming skin

Very interesting concept. I can see a lot of application. Imagine this on a nano-scale going inside a living organism and exploring.

iRobot has been working on DARPA's ChemBot project, and they've come up with a robot based on jamming skin-enabled locomotion (JSEL). They use a granular substance that can change state from a solid to a liquid on command.



More here, here and here

mercredi 14 octobre 2009

"Personally I cannot see any alternative to ramping up the fear factor."

Oh boy... In a article in the UK telegraph, it is being said that we are in denial about global warming and the only way to solve the problem is to ramp up the fear factor (inconvenient truth #2 ?).

For any agreement to be struck (talking about Copenhagen) it is likely that rich countries will have to agree to cut carbon emissions by consuming less energy.
So...
  1. There is no proof that CO2 is the cause of climate changes (see my blog post about recent research)
  2. It has been calculated that even if we cut CO2 to drastic level, the impact on future temperature will be negligible.
  3. It is well known that if we do this, the impact on the world economy will be disastrous.
  4. They never talk about the clean, high density form of energy we have been using for decades, clean, reliable nuclear power.
Then in order to submit to the biggest lie in the history of modern times, we have to be psychologically treated to more fear. Who will profit from that?

The world temperature is changing, this is obvious, this is true. Is it caused by CO2? Not likely, if so, in a very minuscule way. Will it change anything even if we consume less and use less energy, obviously no. I documented all aspect of this on this blog.

What we need is this:
  1. More nuclear power, NOW!
  2. More desalination plants based on nuclear power
  3. Less fossil fuels electricity generation (coal, natural gas)
  4. Better, more efficient cars, like hybrids and electric
  5. Less cars on the road, this means a transport system that is much faster than taking your cars.
  6. Less low energy density power generation like wind and solar
  7. More research on new nuclear, thorium power
  8. More research on carbon nano tube for high density ultra capacitor for the electric car of the future.
  9. More research and development on pyrolysis and gasification to recycle 100% of the waste we produce
If we go this route, we will be equipped to adapt to any climate change this nice planet and surrounding systems will bring us. We will be consuming less fossil fuels and polluting less the air we breath. We will be able to bring dignity to all with a descent energy level.

Help me spread the good news that solutions are here. Working to cut down CO2 only to solve a non-existing problem, will waste a lot of time, money, resources that should be spent on real solutions to real problems.

mardi 13 octobre 2009

Energy of the future ?

I documented this previously. Here's a new presentation on the subject of: liquid-fluoride thorium reactor



Quote from the full report:

The uranium that makes conventional nuclear power possible has a number of disadvantages. For one thing, uranium reactors generate large quantities of waste – some of which remains dangerous for millenia and a small proportion of which can be used to make nuclear weapons. A second issue is that uranium is a comparatively scarce material, which exists in significant quantities in a small number of countries.

For both of these reasons, a growing number of scientists and energy experts believe that the world should investigate the possibility of switching from uranium to thorium as its main nuclear fuel. Compared to uranium, thorium is far more abundant as well as much more energy-dense – a person’s lifetime energy needs could be held in one hand. In addition, the waste products generated by thorium are virtually impossible to turn into the plutonium needed for nuclear weapons production – and they remain dangerous for hundred of years rather than thousands.

There are a number of different ways to use thorium to produce electricity. In Manchester, Kirk Sorensen made the case for liquid-fluoride reactors. This technology was developed by the US military in the 1950s and 1960s and was shown to have many benefits. For example, reactors of this type can be both small and massively productive. Despite its early promise, research into liquid-fluoride thorium reactors was abandoned – the most likely reason being that the technology offered no potential for producing nuclear weapons.

Iran Nuclear program, what is happening

Here's some videos from the Real News network on this questions and one from Democracy now. Always good to see some perceptive on things.

Part 1:

More at The Real News


Part 2:

More at The Real News


Part 3:

More at The Real News


Part 4:

More at The Real News


Part 5:

More at The Real News


Democracy Now : Fmr. UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter Warns Against “Politically Motivated Hype” on Iran Nuke Program

samedi 10 octobre 2009

Climate change alarmists and their friends hitting new low

A lot as been happening in the last week or so on the debate side of climate change. With the upcoming Copenhagen climate talks, the world "leaders" and nefarious climate alarmists are pushing harder than ever on the global consciousness, with the help of their good friend of the mass media, to convince us that the world is warming and that is caused by CO2 from human sources.

This is necessary to support their cause and their views that human development is bad for the planet and push their "green" investments where they have put a lot of money.

I display this graph again and again to show that the relation between CO2 and temperature is not happening. You can read more on this here.

The science is showing us that CO2 is not the cause of the ups and downs we have experienced in the last centuries. But that does not stop those that want to scare us to create horror movies for kids like this based on lies.



This is worst than the science-fiction movie Al Gore made a few years ago, "inconvenient truth", based again on lies. Lies? you ask, that was not true? Nope... Most of the "facts" used in this scare movie, showed to kids all over the world, including my own kids multiple times is filled with lies, exaggerations, and distorted facts to make us believe that humans are responsible for all the bad things happening in this planet. Go read this document: 35 Inconvenient Truths - The errors in Al Gore’s movie or this one in french.

Even the United Nations is using graphs and facts distorted to fit their views. It is a good thing that we have web sites like Anthony Watts - Watts Up With That? and Steve McIntyre - Climate Audit to get to the truth and denounce those lies.

One thing that grabbed my attention was this story published in Iran about the role of cosmic rays, clouds and the sun on the climate. No mention of this in our media.
"A loss of clouds of 4 or 5 per cent may not sound very much, but it briefly increases the sunlight reaching the oceans by about 2 watt per square meter, and that's equivalent to all the global warming during the 20th Century."
On the ocean side of things, we now have new data showing the ocean temperatures are dropping. More on this here.

samedi 3 octobre 2009

Very funny video about real science.

To put this in context... There has been a lot of debate since the release of the raw data on Yamal tree rings that helped create the hockey stick graph "proving" that man made (anthropogenic) global warming is "real". See my next post for more information and this search for a good background on the debate.

Someone very creative created those subtitle on a old Hitler movie.