FEMA Denies Aid to Tornado Victims

Electric cars may not be so green after all...

by Ben Webster

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

An electric car owner would have to drive at least 129,000km before producing a net saving in CO2. Many electric cars will not travel that far in their lifetime because they typically have a range of less than 145km on a single charge and are unsuitable for long trips. Even those driven 160,000km would save only about a tonne of CO2 over their lifetimes.

The British study, which is the first analysis of the full lifetime emissions of electric cars covering manufacturing, driving and disposal, undermines the case for tackling climate change by the rapid introduction of electric cars.

The Committee on Climate Change, the UK government watchdog, has called for the number of electric cars on Britain's roads to increase from a few hundred now to 1.7 million by 2020.

Britain's Department for Transport is spending $66 million over the next year giving up to 8,600 buyers of electric cars a grant of $7700 towards the purchase price. Ministers are considering extending the scheme.

The study was commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which is jointly funded by the British government and the car industry. It found that a mid-size electric car would produce 23.1 tonnes of CO2 over its lifetime, compared with 24 tonnes for a similar petrol car. Emissions from manufacturing electric cars are at least 50 per cent higher because batteries are made from materials such as lithium, copper and refined silicon, which require much energy to be processed.

Many electric cars are expected to need a replacement battery after a few years. Once the emissions from producing the second battery are added in, the total CO2 from producing an electric car rises to 12.6 tonnes, compared with 5.6 tonnes for a petrol car. Disposal also produces double the emissions because of the energy consumed in recovering and recycling metals in the battery. The study also took into account carbon emitted to generate the grid electricity consumed.

Greg Archer, director of Low CVP, said the industry should state the full lifecycle emissions of cars rather than just tailpipe emissions, to avoid misleading consumers. He said that drivers wanting to minimise emissions could be better off buying a small, efficient petrol or diesel car. “People have to match the technology to their particular needs,” he said.

Read More...

Defending the Faith Part 2: Why Tactics?

by Greg Koukl
Let’s discuss our need for tactics, what they are, and how to use them.

Our need for tactics concerns our commission to be effective ambassadors for Christ. Ambassadors use three essential skills:

Knowledge: an accurately informed mind
Wisdom: an artful method
Character: an attractive manner


These skills play a part in every effective engagement with a non-believer.

The second skill the artful method, or “tactical wisdom” is our focus in this series of emails. Tactics are distinct from strategy. Strategy involves the big picture, the large-scale operation, of one’s positioning prior to engagement. I use the term “strategy” in reference to the tremendous resources of knowledge available to us to be adequately prepared to give an account for the hope that is in us (1 Peter 3:15). In our case, Christianity has strategic superiority it is well “positioned” on the battlefield because our ideas can hold up under serious scrutiny compared to other views.

We have an excellent case. We have the best answers to life’s most important questions.

Tactics entail the artful arranging of resources, specifically in maneuvering through conversations. They allow you to:

Use your knowledge in creative ways.
Choreograph the particulars of your response.
Style your response to objections.
Employ specific methods in addressing attacks.
Guide yourself with sound reasoning, clear thinking, and aggressive advocacy.
Often a clever commander has the advantage over a superior opponent through deft tactical maneuvering.

Tactics should not be used as tricks or slick ruses, clever ploys to destroy non-Christians, forcing them to submit to your point of view, attempts to belittle or humiliate to gain notches in your spiritual belt.

Instead, tactics should enable you to present the truth clearly and persuasively. They should enable you to maneuver and get a footing or an advantage in a conversation, helping you to navigate through the minefields. Tactics put you in the driver’s seat, allowing you to, in many cases, stop a challenger cold and turn the tables, offering him the arguments for Christianity he should carefully consider.

The goal in using tactics is to:

Manage, not manipulate
Control, not coerce
Finesse, not fight

Tactics are powerful and can be abused quite easily. It’s not difficult to make someone look silly with these techniques. We should be direct, focused and challenging, but never abrasive, abusive or alarming. This is where the third quality of an ambassador plays an important role: Character an attractive manner. Our goal is to find clever ways to exploit another’s bad thinking for the purposes of guiding them to truth.

In the next e-mail I’ll introduce you to Lieutenant Columbo, the “queen mother” of all tactics.

Next week: The "Queen Mother" of Tactics

For more extensive tactics training go to www.str.org and look for Tactics in Defending the Faith Mentoring Series or STRi DVD interactive training in our online store or call Stand to Reason at 1-800-2-REASON.

Shannan Parker's Description Of The Crucifixion

Global Warming Charlatans Feel the Heat

by Alan Caruba

The University of Virginia, after vigorously resisting a Freedom of Information Act (FOI) request for data related to the emails of Michael Mann, was the subject of a court order to make them available. While global warming is known worldwide for its claim that manmade warming would doom the Earth, the names and machinations behind the fraud are far less well known.

Mann, a climatologist, was part of a relatively small clique of charlatans who, working for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), conjured up all manner of “proof” that the Earth was on dangerous trajectory, heating up. Mann invented the “hockey stick” graph that demonstrated this bit of climate magic.

With Al Gore as the most famous face of global warming, Mann and others lent credibility to the IPCC that called for massive reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions resulting from energy use of fossil fuels, primarily oil and coal.

Mann’s problem began when the “hockey stick” graph was debunked and demolished as bogus. All this occurred while Mann was on the faculty of the University of Virginia and while large amounts of research grant money were being received by the University to support Mann and others.

Read More...

Sun Headed Into Hibernation, Solar Studies Predict

by Victoria Jaggard

Enjoy our stormy sun while it lasts. When our star drops out of its latest sunspot activity cycle, the sun is most likely going into hibernation, scientists announced today.

Three independent studies of the sun's insides, surface, and upper atmosphere all predict that the next solar cycle will be significantly delayed—if it happens at all. Normally, the next cycle would be expected to start roughly around 2020.

The combined data indicate that we may soon be headed into what's known as a grand minimum, a period of unusually low solar activity.

The predicted solar "sleep" is being compared to the last grand minimum on record, which occurred between 1645 and 1715.

Known as the Maunder Minimum, the roughly 70-year period coincided with the coldest spell of the Little Ice Age, when European canals regularly froze solid and Alpine glaciers encroached on mountain villages.

Read More...

Yale, Jews, and Double Standards

by Caroline B. Glick

Last week Yale University announced its decision to close down its institute for the study of anti-Semitism. The move has been widely criticized as politically motivated. For its part, the university claims that the move was the result of purely academic considerations.

While not clear-cut, an analysis of the story lends to the conclusion that politics were in all likelihood the decisive factor in the decision. And the implications of Yale's move for the scholarly inquiry into anti-Semitism are deeply troubling.

The Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Anti-Semitism (YIISA) was founded in 2006. Its purpose was to provide a scholarly approach to the study of contemporary and historical anti- Semitism. It was attached to Yale's Institution of Social and Policy Studies. It was fully funded from private contributions. Yale did not in any way subsidize its activities from the university's budget.

Since its inception, under the peripatetic leadership of its Executive Director Dr. Charles Small, YIISA organized seminars and conferences that brought leading scholars from all over the world to Yale to discuss anti-Semitism in an academic setting. Its conferences and publications produced cutting edge research. These included a groundbreaking statistical study published by Small and Prof. Edward Kaplan from Yale's School of Management that demonstrated a direct correlation between anti-Israel sentiment and anti- Jewish sentiment.


At a large conference last August titled, "Global anti-Semitism: A Crisis of Modernity," among other things, YIISA confronted the genocidal nature of Islamic anti-Semitism. The conference produced more than 800 pages of scholarly research materials on all facets of anti-Semitism, including anti-Semitism in Western academia.

Read More...

“This is What Democracy Looks Like” Yemeni Style

by Trevor Loudon

Do you think this crowd has a Jeffersonian constitutional republic in mind?

Mob power, egged on by Marxists, Iranian agents and the Muslim Brotherhood, is not a recipe for any sort of stable Western style government.

Dictatorship is inevitable. its just a matter of what flavor.



by Socialist Aotearoa

Huge crowds celebrated on the streets of Yemen on Sunday after president Ali Abdullah Saleh fled to Saudi Arabia—saying he needed medical treatment.

“The people have brought down the regime,” chanted the crowds in University Square at the heart of the capital, Sana’a. Protesters have renamed it Change Square and camped there since February.

Saleh, who has held power in the country for 33 years, was injured in an attack on the presidential compound on Friday of last week. Other leading members of his regime were also hurt.

Throughout Friday and Saturday, members of Saleh’s regime insisted that the injuries were minor.

However on Sunday morning it was announced that Saleh had left to have surgery.

Although Saleh’s supporters still say he will come back “in a few days”, that was looking increasingly unlikely.

“The squares have been filling up with people celebrating, and that in itself makes it harder for the dictator to return,” Abubakr Al-Shamahi, a Yemeni activist based in Britain, told the British Socialist Worker newspaper…

The real risk is that the Yemeni protest movement does not continue after Saleh resigns.

But Abubakr Al-Shamahi thinks it will.

“Yemenis are very stubborn people,” he said. “They’ve suffered 800 dead. People won’t let things go back to ‘normal’. People want change.”

Read More...

Rising forest density offsets climate change

by Alister Doyle

(Reuters) - Rising forest density in many countries is helping to offset climate change caused by deforestation from the Amazon basin to Indonesia, a study showed on Sunday.

The report indicated that the size of trees in a forest -- rather than just the area covered -- needed to be taken into account more in U.N.-led efforts to put a price on forests as part of a nascent market to slow global warming.

"Higher density means world forests are capturing more carbon," experts in Finland and the United States said...

Read More...

Marine Not Allowed To Wear Uniform For High School Graduation

Radicalization of Muslims in U.S. prisons

High Speed Rail Subsidies in Iowa: Nothing for Something

by Wendell Cox

The Federal government is again offering money it does not have to entice a state (Iowa) to spend money that it does not have on something it does not need. The state of Iowa is being asked to provide funds to match federal funding for a so-called "high speed rail" line from Chicago to Iowa City. The new rail line would simply duplicate service that is already available. Luxury intercity bus service is provided between Iowa City and Chicago twice daily. The luxury buses are equipped with plugs for laptop computers and with free wireless high-speed internet service. Perhaps most surprisingly, the luxury buses make the trip faster than the so-called high speed rail line, at 3:50 hours. The trains would take more than an hour longer (5:00 hours). No one would be able to get to Chicago quicker than now. Only in America does anyone call a train that averages 45 miles per hour "high speed rail."

Read More...

Renewable Energy Requires Vast Amounts of Natural Resources

by Robert Bryce

IN April, Gov. Jerry Brown made headlines by signing into law an ambitious mandate that requires California to obtain one-third of its electricity from renewable energy sources like sunlight and wind by 2020. Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia now have renewable electricity mandates. President Obama and several members of Congress have supported one at the federal level. Polls routinely show strong support among voters for renewable energy projects — as long as they don’t cost too much.

But there’s the rub: while energy sources like sunlight and wind are free and naturally replenished, converting them into large quantities of electricity requires vast amounts of natural resources — most notably, land. Even a cursory look at these costs exposes the deep contradictions in the renewable energy movement.

Consider California’s new mandate. The state’s peak electricity demand is about 52,000 megawatts. Meeting the one-third target will require (if you oversimplify a bit) about 17,000 megawatts of renewable energy capacity. Let’s assume that California will get half of that capacity from solar and half from wind. Most of its large-scale solar electricity production will presumably come from projects like the $2 billion Ivanpah solar plant, which is now under construction in the Mojave Desert in southern California. When completed, Ivanpah, which aims to provide 370 megawatts of solar generation capacity, will cover 3,600 acres — about five and a half square miles.

The math is simple: to have 8,500 megawatts of solar capacity, California would need at least 23 projects the size of Ivanpah, covering about 129 square miles, an area more than five times as large as Manhattan. While there’s plenty of land in the Mojave, projects as big as Ivanpah raise environmental concerns. In April, the federal Bureau of Land Management ordered a halt to construction on part of the facility out of concern for the desert tortoise, which is protected under the Endangered Species Act.

Wind energy projects require even more land. The Roscoe wind farm in Texas, which has a capacity of 781.5 megawatts, covers about 154 square miles. Again, the math is straightforward: to have 8,500 megawatts of wind generation capacity, California would likely need to set aside an area equivalent to more than 70 Manhattans. Apart from the impact on the environment itself, few if any people could live on the land because of the noise (and the infrasound, which is inaudible to most humans but potentially harmful) produced by the turbines.

Read More...

Taxpayers Face Multibillion Dollar Loss from Auto Bailouts

by David Skeel

President Obama's visit to a Chrysler plant in Toledo, Ohio, on Friday was the culmination of a campaign to portray the auto bailouts as a brilliant success with no unpleasant side effects. "The industry is back on its feet," the president said, "repaying its debt, gaining ground."

If the government hadn't stepped in and dictated the terms of the restructuring, the story goes, General Motors and Chrysler would have collapsed, and at least a million jobs would have been lost. The bailouts averted disaster, and they did so at remarkably little cost.

The problem with this happy story is that neither of its parts is accurate. Commandeering the bankruptcy process was not, as apologists for the bailouts claim, the only hope for GM and Chrysler. And the long-term costs of the bailouts will be enormous.

In late 2008, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson tapped the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Fund to lend more than $17 billion to General Motors and Chrysler. With the fate of the car companies still uncertain at the outset of the Obama administration in 2009, Mr. Obama set up an auto task force headed by "car czar" Steve Rattner.

Under the strategy that was chosen, each of the companies was required to file for bankruptcy as a condition of receiving additional funding. Rather than undergo a restructuring under ordinary bankruptcy rules, however, each corporation pretended to "sell" its assets to a new entity that was set up for the purposes of the sale.

With Chrysler, the new entity paid $2 billion, which went to Chrysler's senior lenders, giving them a small portion of the $6.9 billion they were owed. (Fiat was given a large stake in the new entity, although it did not contribute any money). But the "sale" also ensured that Chrysler's unionized retirees would receive a big recovery on their $10 billion claim—a $4.6 billion promissory note and 55% of Chrysler's stock—even though they were lower priority creditors.

If other bidders were given a legitimate opportunity to top the $2 billion of government money on offer, this might have been a legitimate transaction. But they weren't. A bid wouldn't count as "qualified" unless it had the same strings as the government bid—a sizeable payment to union retirees and full payment of trade debt. If a bidder wanted to offer $2.5 billion for Chrysler's Jeep division, he was out of luck. With General Motors, senior creditors didn't get trampled in the same way. But the "sale," which left the government with 61% of GM's stock, was even more of a sham.

Read More...

Bill Warner: Kafir Civilization

On May 12, 2011 Bill Warner was the opening speaker for Geert Wilders in Nashville, TN. This is his 14 minute speech about our civilization and Islam.

Click here for your free copy of Sharia Law For The Non Muslim...

Tennessee Bans Freedom of Speech

by Aaron M. Kelly
 

If you haven't heard about it, you probably don't read American newspapers: Tennessee's legislature has amended its laws to ban causing people to become "emotionally distressed" from images posted online.

The new law, which comes into effect on July 1, 2011, will make a criminal out of anyone who, "Communicates with another person or transmits or displays an image in a manner in which there is a reasonable expectation that the image will be viewed by the victim by any method described in subdivision (a)(1), without legitimate purpose."

The methods in the subdivision (a)(1) that is referred to include telephone, writing, or electronic communication, including text messaging, fax messages, e-mail, and Internet service.

In addition to other triggering clauses, such as making the communication with malicious intent, the communication or display of image can trigger the offence if done:

"In a manner the defendant knows, or reasonably should know, would frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress to a similarly situated person of reasonable sensibilities; and

As the result of the communication, the person is frightened, intimidated or emotionally distressed."

Interestingly, the "communicates with another person" provision already existed, so Tennesseans have been living with what seems to be a blatantly unconstitutional law for awhile now. What the new law does is to also make publishing pictures which disturb people an offence. To be clear, the law does not require that an accused even directly contact the offended individual. It describes the offended party as the "victim," but makes it an offence to communicate with another "person" in a way that might offend that "victim." Clearly, even communicating with third parties without a legitimate purpose can result in a conviction.

What is markedly absent from the law is what exactly constitutes a "legitimate purpose." This means that as long as the elements of the offence are made out, a case can be brought against someone for posting an image which disturbs someone else, and the accused will be forced to argue that they met whatever the vague standard of a "legitimate purpose" happens to be.

Here are some situations which, if the court does not find they have a "legitimate purpose," would lead to someone being convicted of a crime in the State of Tennessee:

Read More...

Defending the Faith Part 1: A More Excellent Way

by Greg Koukl

Many friends of Stand to Reason use our materials because they agree that Christianity, when properly understood and properly articulated, can take its place in the marketplace of ideas. They want to be able to effectively communicate the message of the Gospel to those who don’t understand or agree. This series of e-mails will help you learn tactics that, when used skillfully and winsomely, will make you a more effective ambassador for Christ.

Let me offer you a word of encouragement. I’ve been defending the faith actively and “professionally” for over two decades with people who oppose evangelical Christian views and are professionals in their own right atheists, skeptics, Mormons, Jewish rabbis, and secularists.

When I started, I wasn’t sure how I would fare in public against the pros with thousands of people listening. But what I discovered was that the facts and sound reason are on our side. We don’t have to be frightened of the truth or the opposition if we do our homework. After all, even people who don’t like tests don’t mind them much when they know the answers.

The truth is this: The Gospel can be defended if it’s properly understood and properly articulated by a winsome ambassador. If we take our time and think through the issues, we can make a solid defense. If we have the truth, there will always be a flaw in the opposing argument. Keep looking for it. Sooner or later it will show up.

The right tactic will help you discover the flaw in your opponent’s argument and show it for the error it is.

Remember that some of the most intelligent people make the most foolish mistakes in thinking when it comes to spiritual things. The tactics you learn in this series of e-mails will help you identify those mistakes. You will see that people don’t give much thought to their objections. How do I know? I’ve listen to lots of objections.

Apologetics has a questionable reputation among non-aficionados. By definition, apologists “defend” the faith. They “defeat” false ideas. They “destroy” speculations raised up against the knowledge of God.

Those sound like fightin’ words to many people: Circle the wagons. Hoist the drawbridge. Fix bayonets. Load weapons. Ready, aim, fire. It’s not surprising, then, that believers and unbelievers alike associate apologetics with conflict. In their view, defenders don’t dialogue; they fight.

In addition to the image problem, apologists face another barrier. The truth is that effective apologetics in the 21st century requires more than having the right answers. It’s too easy for post-moderns to ignore our facts, deny our claims, or simply yawn and walk away from the line we’ve drawn in the sand.

I’d like to suggest a “more excellent way.” Jesus said that when you find yourself a sheep amidst wolves, be innocent but shrewd. This instruction calls for a tactical approach. Even though there is real warfare going on, our engagements should look more like diplomacy than combat.

In the emails you’ll receive over the next several weeks, I’ll share lessons I’ve learned from years of engaging critics of Christianity. These are practical tactics that can make a real difference in equipping you and building your confidence to engage non-Christians in conversations about the most important topic possible their relationship to God.

Next time: Why tactics?

For more extensive tactics training go to www.str.org and look for Tactics in Defending the Faith Mentoring Series or STRi DVD interactive training in our online store or call Stand to Reason at 1-800-2-REASON.

Federal Judge Lifts Ban on Prayer in Valedictorian Speech

Klavan's One-State Solution: Give the Middle East to the Jews!

Abbott & Costello: "Two Tens for a Five"

Obama administration pushing for same-sex foster care

New UN Treaty Seeks To Limit US Gun Rights

by Larry Bell

It may not come as surprising news to many of you that the United Nations doesn’t approve of our Second Amendment. Not one bit. And they very much hope to do something about it with help from some powerful American friends. Under the guise of a proposed global “Small Arms Treaty” premised to fight “terrorism”, “insurgency” and “international crime syndicates” you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms.

What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail?

While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).
4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

Read More...

Gaddafi-style socialism will solve America’s problems

Germaine Greer: Kill Your Dogs

by Britain's Daily Telegraph

Outspoken Australian feminist Germaine Greer has launched a stinging attack on domestic dogs, blaming them for the ruination of a protected perennial flower, the English bluebell.

Addressing Britain's Hay Festival on Thursday, the 72-year-old Melbourne-born academic who owns a patch of land covered in the plant that flowers in spring, pointed the finger at toxic dog poo for the plant's scarcity. "If you love your bluebells, kill your dog," said Greer dramatically...

Read More...

Two Iraqi Nationals Indicted on Terrorism Charges in KY

by U.S. Department of Justice

WASHINGTON—An Iraqi citizen who allegedly carried out numerous improvised explosive device (IED) attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and another Iraqi national alleged to have participated in the insurgency in Iraq have been arrested and indicted on federal terrorism charges in the Western District of Kentucky.

Waad Ramadan Alwan, 30, and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 23, both former residents of Iraq who currently reside in Bowling Green, were charged in a 23-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Bowling Green on May 26, 2011. Alwan is charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals abroad; conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives) against U.S. nationals abroad; distributing information on the manufacture and use of IEDs; attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al Qaeda in Iraq; as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess, and export Stinger missiles. Hammadi is charged with attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al Qaeda in Iraq, as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess, and export Stinger missiles.

“Over the course of roughly eight years, Waad Ramadan Alwan allegedly supported efforts to kill U.S. troops in Iraq, first by participating in the construction and placement of improvised explosive devices in Iraq and, more recently, by attempting to ship money and weapons from the United States to insurgents in Iraq. His co-defendant, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, is accused of many of the same activities. With these arrests, which are the culmination of extraordinary investigative work by law enforcement and intelligence officials, the support provided by these individuals comes to an end and they will face justice,” said Todd Hinnen, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security.

Read More...