This article provides a profile of a long-tenured authority on the hot topic (no pun intended) of global warming and presents a few of his very logical arguments (which have unsurprisingly been overlooked by mainstream media). A few excerpts follow:

Bryson is a believer in climate change, in that he’s as quick as anyone to acknowledge that Earth’s climate has done nothing but change throughout the planet’s existence. In fact, he took that knowledge a big step further, earlier than probably anyone else. Almost 40 years ago, Bryson stood before the American Association for the Advancement of Science and presented a paper saying human activity could alter climate.

“I was laughed off the platform for saying that,” he told Wisconsin Energy Cooperative News.

We ask Bryson what could be making the key difference:

Q: Could you rank the things that have the most significant impact and where would you put carbon dioxide on the list?

A: Well let me give you one fact first. In the first 30 feet of the atmosphere, on the average, outward radiation from the Earth, which is what CO2 is supposed to affect, how much [of the reflected energy] is absorbed by water vapor? In the first 30 feet, 80 percent, okay?

Q: Eighty percent of the heat radiated back from the surface is absorbed in the first 30 feet by water vapor…

A: And how much is absorbed by carbon dioxide? Eight hundredths of one percent. One one-thousandth as important as water vapor. You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.

This begs questions about the widely publicized mathematical models researchers run through supercomputers to generate climate scenarios 50 or 100 years in the future. Bryson says the data fed into the computers overemphasizes carbon dioxide and accounts poorly for the effects of clouds—water vapor. Asked to evaluate the models’ long-range predictive ability, he answers with another question: “Do you believe a five-day forecast?”

Bryson says he looks in the opposite direction, at past climate conditions, for clues to future climate behavior. Trying that approach in the weeks following our interview, Wisconsin Energy Cooperative News soon found six separate papers about Antarctic ice core studies, published in peer-reviewed scientific journals between 1999 and 2006. The ice core data allowed researchers to examine multiple climate changes reaching back over the past 650,000 years. All six studies found atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations tracking closely with temperatures, but with CO2 lagging behind changes in temperature, rather than leading them. The time lag between temperatures moving up—or down—and carbon dioxide following ranged from a few hundred to a few thousand years.

Recent research is indicating that it’s not just mothers that have physical changes as a result of pregnancy….us dads are changing too. Here’s an excerpt:

There’s also preliminary but tantalizing evidence that fatherhood can change the brain. A 2006 study found enhancements in the prefrontal cortex of the father marmoset. After childbirth, the neurons in this region showed greater connectivity, suggesting that having young children could boost the part of the brain responsible for planning and memory, skills parents need when having kids gives them more to keep track of. The neurons also had more receptors for vasopressin, a hormone that has been shown to prompt animal fathers to bond with offspring.

The article also mentions that such research is sparse, especially in relation to the voluminous research on moms. We matter too, right?

This article provides a detailed recap of the success of Al Qaeda since 9/11, noting how US policy (particularly in regards to Iraq) has contributed to such success. It also discusses the approach the US should take to defeat Al Qaeda. The author is Bruce Riedel, a 29-year CIA veteran.

Also, I want to take a minute to endorse the web site/magazine in which this article was published - Foreign Affairs. It’s the only magazine I receive in hard-copy format and probably the most influential magazine in the US today. The articles are by experts/leading world figures of all political leanings and there is no fluff. It’s published bi-monthly ($32 per year).

Rejection rates of Chinese food imports 25x those of Canada…wow. That’s not a rounding error.

I’m glad to see this matter receiving more attention as of late. I can’t say that I have a lot of faith in the Chinese government to clean up their act with regards to ensuring no tainted food leaves their country. Nor do I anticipate the FDA doing anything respect-worthy. Sadly, it may take a catastrophie to get the wheels turning here.

The American Lung Association recently released their annual study, “State of the Air”, on smog and soot levels across the US. The results were mixed, with smog levels decreasing across the country, while soot levels were found to be increasing - especially in the Eastern part of the US. The blame for the soot increases is being placed on the prevalence of coal-fired power plants in the affected areas.

The report is not without controversy (no surprise there), as the article also contains arguments refuting the accuracy of the findings by a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute.

Should Bush get the all-you-can eat buffet bar he desires or should he be spoon-fed a 2 oz jar of Gerber? Or, put another way, just what exactly should the role of Congress be in regards to the declaration, execution and conclusion of wars?

I believe that Congress shouldn’t call the play-by-play (bomb this city, spare that one) but should actively declare war (and not delegate such authority by offering a blank “start a war if ya wanna” card to the President). Likewise, if Congress believes we are in a situation where American interests are better served by ending our involvement, I feel it’s their obligation to put that on the President’s desk.

My trade dictates that I take a beginning-of-year hiatus…glad to be back.

Nothing groundbreaking here. I just wanted to point out that a Republican presidential candidate that many believe to be a “true conservative” was in favor of a most anti-conservative legislation, that being campaign finance reform. It’s a WashPost article, so log in will be required.

Forget Democrats mentioning “phased redeployment”. Insurgent Iraqis already have plenty of motivation coming across their airwaves. Sick, disgusting motivation in the form of graphic videos displaying American soldiers being attacked and killed.

I was impressed with the Bush health care proposal mentioned in the SOTU address last night (although $15,000 may be too high for the amount of the deduction) . His plan would hopefully move health-care purchasing decisions from HR departments to the individual level. I believe it would result in a far greater selection of plans and better cost control. Elegantly simple.

Not very impressed with the remainder of his speech, though.

In the spirit of the ousted Republicans, it looks like a ton of legislative action will be pushed through by the Democrats without meaningful debate. The list details their January wish list…watch out for that veto pen.

1. Toughen House ethics rules
2. Restore ‘pay as you go’ budget rules
3. Adopt recommendations of the 9/11 Commission
4. Raise the federal minimum wage
5. Promote embyonic stem cell research
6. Negotiate lower Medicare prescription drug prices
7. Reduce interest rates on student loans
8. Roll back tax breaks for energy companies