The idea for this animation came from a bumper sticker we saw in town the other day . . .

Editorial excerpt from IBD.

Jet Fuel-Gate Is Obama’s New Solyndra

Ecofanaticism: SolyndraGate was no isolated case of corrupt government misspending. The U.S. Navy was just forced to buy 450,000 gallons of biofuels from an Obama-connected firm at an outrageous $16 per gallon.

The massive Obama stimulus was supposed to generate millions of jobs, but the $535 million loan guarantee it gave to solar panel maker Solyndra on the eve of its Chapter 11 bankruptcy illustrated the fundamental incompetence of Obama’s neo-Keynesian economic ideology.

Now we find the Navy partnering with the Agriculture Department to purchase hundreds of thousands of gallons of alternative biofuel in place of standard JP-5 fuel for Navy aircraft — the biggest federal purchase of biofuel ever.

It’s part of the White House’s “we can’t wait for Congress” strategy as the 2012 election year looms. But JP-5 typically costs less than $4 a gallon. If a family on a budget started filling up with $16-a-gallon gas, it might want to adopt the motto, “we can’t wait to go broke.”

. . .

The biofuel will be used next summer by — we’re not making this up — “the Great Green Fleet Carrier Strike Force” in exercises near Hawaii. Mabus painted the picture of America’s great naval force advancing from sails to coal to diesel to nuclear, and now finally to biofuels. But if we keep starving the Navy, it may soon not have enough loose change to repair the sails on Old Ironsides.

Read the entire editorial.

We’re back in California this evening and plan to stay for a couple of days. On our way in to the coast, we passed the Banning Pass wind turbine farm.

Despite having literally thousands of these expensive (to build AND to run) bat-killers, there seems to be a number of new ones under construction. Damsel took this photo of some of the construction we passed. Click on the image to enlarge.

I wonder if the companies building this enormous (and unsightly) wind farm are somehow capitalized by the same money-wasters responsible for the Solyndra debacle. I wonder how far this is going to go. The turbines already stretch for over twenty miles along both sides of Interstate 10 from Palm Springs to past Whitewater (going west).

The Consumers Alliance for Global Prosperity has a new video out exposing Greenpeace and how Greenpeace’s environmentalism actually hurts the developing world. I had to laugh at the sinister sounding Halloween-ish narration.

Via Planet Gore.

California’s Greenbat politicians think that burning fossil fuel will destroy the planet, so what do they do? Trade off having wind power in favor of destroying many of nature’s flying creatures.

Consider this double standard. California Politicians are balking at the installation of a solar power site in the desert because it endangers tortoises and other wildlife. Their hypocrisy is so thick, it probably pollutes the atmosphere.

From William La Jeunesse of Fox News:

As California attempts to divorce itself from fossil-fueled electricity, it may be trading one environmental sin for another — although you don’t hear state officials admitting it.

Wind power is the fastest growing component in the state’s green energy portfolio, but wildlife advocates say the marriage has an unintended consequence: dead birds, including protected species of eagles, hawks and owls.

[more]

An unwanted (or maybe wanted by Gore, et al) side effect of global climate change hysteria is a new class of over-reacting nutjobs developing psychosis based on the misconception that humankind is actually capable of destroying the planet by burning fossil fuels.

I read this article published on the CO2 Science website about Austrailian scientists diagnosing “Carborexia,” The Debilitating Disease of Climate Alarmism. Excerpt:

Writing in the International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, Searle and Gow (2011) say “there is a growing consensus that increased awareness about climate change is leading to negative emotional reactions in certain individuals (Fritze et al., 2008),” while noting that “expressions of negative psychological states relating to climate change appear in popular commentary, public opinion polls and increasingly in the medical and psychological literature (Searle and Gow, 2009).” And they add that “doctors are reporting that more and more patients, presenting with anxiety and depression, are citing climate change news as something that they are having difficulty coping with” and that “leads to distress and/or interferes with daily living (Fritze et al., 2008).”

The two Australian researchers note that “other climate related pathologies are also emerging,” citing the work of Wolf and Salo (2008), who “described a patient with climate change delusions and visions of apocalyptic events who believed that his personal water consumption could lead to the deaths of millions of people,” while they write of “an increase in climate-related obsessive compulsive checking behaviors such as checking: gas and power meters to monitor their usage; taps for leaking water; and petrol consumption via the car’s odometer reading.” In fact, they report that displays of climate change related obsessive and depressive behaviors has led to the creation of the term “carborexia,” which “refers to individuals who have a fanatical desire to reduce their personal carbon footprint, to the point where it severely affects their lifestyle and normal daily activities.”

Emphasis mine. Read the rest of the article.

I found this to be very funny. FEED ME SEYMOUR!

Funny and sad at the same time. Green initiatives continue to paralyze American businesses and personal freedoms.

The BEEB came up with a BS theory that CO2 is “Killing Nemo,” the clownfish from the popular Disney cartoon feature. It seems that the fish are losing hearing due to increased acidification of the oceans due to CO2 absorption. However, the Blogprof debunks the story in the following paragraph:

Now, what interested me about the article the most is the above argument is a tacit admission that any extra CO2 in the atmosphere doesn’t stay in the atmosphere but is rather absorbed by various surfaces and media including the ocean. This undermines the alarmists claim that extra CO2 produced by man remains in the atmosphere and causes global warming. you cannot have both. Either the extra CO2 remains in the atmosphere or it does not. It turns out that the acidification of the oceans is more backed by science than non-existent global warming: News: CO2 levels in atmosphere haven’t changed in at least 150 years
.

Via: Planet Gore

When the Governator signed the California ammo microstamping bill, we knew we had to be out of there. Our other focus, of course, was the insane green policies endorsed by this P.O.S.

Ramirez seems to share our latter viewpoint with his latest . . .

Ramirez notices that we’re getting the usual half-truth from the Japanese disaster.