Mark Tapscott Editorial: How American Industry Aided the Chilean Rescue

Watching the rescue late into the first night and seeing how flawless the rescue was going, made me remark -- "I bet it was Yankee ingenuity" that is behind this. Now that the truth is out, it turns out to be true as pointed out by Mark Tapscott in his Washington Examiner Editorial today.

When the Chilean President Sebastián Piñera was thanking people for their help  noticed he thanked Americans but did not thank Obama which was very telling. He replaced a woman in the spring from the Socialist Party who had been President of Chili for four years which is all they can serve. The people of Chile ousted the Socialist Party to elect Sebastián Piñera who was educated in America. Would bet the former socialist President would not have reached out to any other country except her friends like Chavez who would have been no help.

The spirit of ingenuity and willingness to help solve problems is missing in a socialist government and the main reason that the Democrats are in so much trouble this year -- they have tried to take America socialist and the vast majority of American people are saying 'NO WAY!' The Government is not there to run our lives no matter how much Obama, Pelosi, and Reid want to say they know more than we do on what is best for us. To that we reply "Bravo Sierra!"

Extremely impressed with the President and First Lady who greeted the miners with hugs. When they sang the Chilean National Anthem you could see the President with his eyes closed fighting back the tears. It was an overwhelming sight. He never wavered that they were going to get those men out. Whatever resources it took, he was going to provide them.

The people who produce our energy have a job most of us would not do -- scared to death of closed in spaces and cannot fathom being out in the Gulf on an oil platform or even out in a remote area drilling. To put together a rescue like what was accomplished in Chile was the result of countries working together and shows what can be done when people don't care about who gets the credit. The rescue went off without a hitch once they started bringing miners to the surface.

Mark Tapscott has it right about this President's photo op and his failure to acknowledge all of the American assistance except NASA who is run by his 'buddy' he wants to use it as an outreach to the Muslim community. Wonder who gave NASA the permission to help or did they offer assistance on their own? Doewsn't seem like something the 'community organizer' would want them involved. His 'photo op' from the White House in the middle of the rescue was absolutely disgusting and reminded me of someone saying "Look at me, look at me -- I am still here!" Obama's arrogance knows no bounds.

November 2nd cannot come soon enough! Looking forward to Obama telling the new Speaker that he will do what he (Obama) says -- no meeting halfway. Do not believe that Obama knows what he is dealing with in John Boehner, Mike Pence, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Kevin, McCarthy, Steve King, Marsha Blackburn and others who are representing the American people not the agenda of Barack Obama.  Obama's days as dictator in his own mind are coming to close whether he recognizes it or not. 

Examiner Editorial: How American industry aided the Chilean rescue
Examiner Editorial
October 15, 2010

Jeff Hart operates heavy machinery
 to lower steel pipes into the escape shaft
 to free the 33 trapped miners at the San Jose
 mine in Chile. (Government of Chile/AP photo)

Television viewers around the world were stirred by images of families reunited and hope reborn as the 33 Chilean miners were brought from more than half a mile below the surface to rejoin the land of the living. The millions who watched should know that it was mainly American ingenuity and technological prowess that made the rescue possible. Unfortunately, President Obama is apparently so invested in demonizing American free enterprise that it never occurred to him to give credit where it's due.

To be sure, Obama acknowledged the role of NASA in designing the escape capsule, the U.S. companies that "manufactured and delivered parts of the rescue drill," and "the American engineer who flew in from Afghanistan to operate the drill." But that hardly begins to describe the crucial importance of the American role and says nothing at all about the economic system that enabled it.

The escape capsule was designed by a team of engineers at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia led by Clinton Cragg. The Cragg team was a remarkable concentration of highly advanced technological know-how and sophisticated engineering talent honed in their work in the U.S. space program. For all of its ups and downs, the U.S. space program has perhaps been the finest illustration possible of what can be achieved by a government-industry partnership in which profit-driven private-sector firms provide by far most of the brains and muscle in attaining a national goal.

Then there was the work of two Pennsylvania firms previously known to few outside the energy industry, Center Rock Inc. of Berlin, Pa., and Schramm Inc. of West Chester, Pa. The former designed and built the 28-inch-wide canisters containing four drills and air hammers that, in conjunction with the T-130 bit designed by Schramm's Jeff Hart, actually dug the rescue hole. Despite their invisibility to the general public, oil and natural gas companies everywhere depend on these two companies because their products are the standard for the industry.

Meanwhile, Obama has appointed a NASA administrator who thinks his first duty is to tell the world about Muslims' historic role in science. Even worse, the president and his political allies in Congress and the Big Green environmental movement rarely miss an opportunity to criticize the American energy industry for a lengthy litany of supposed evils. As Texas corporate executive Bill Whitefield wrote this week in the Houston Chronicle: "The U.S. drilling industry's continually improving safety and environmental standards set the bar for operations worldwide. Though revered abroad, the industry's amazing track record is overshadowed at home by relentless vilification by slick politicians and green lobbies." This is because, as The Wall Street Journal's Daniel Henninger correctly noted, "the U.S. has a government led by a mindset obsessed with 250K-a-year 'millionaires' and given to mocking 'our blind faith in the market.' "

If the polls are right, that will change Nov. 2.

Read more from Mark Tapscott at the Washington Examiner: Washington Examiner

Ken Blackwell: Obama's "Fly Me to the Crescent Moon" Policy

We thought this graphic captures the Obama/Bolden 'Outreach to Muslims' very well and reminds us of the lines from space movies, "We Come in Peace!" It fits perfectly with the editorial by Ken Blackwell at Townhall.com.

Blackwell has a way with words and has done a masterful job of a slap-down of Obama and Bolden on their policy of the newest space frontier is an outreach to Muslims. These three paragraphs speak volumes about why this outreach is so dumb and what Muslim Nations could do on their own:

I have a simple way for Muslim-majority nations to excel in science and technology: Have everyone read a list of Jewish scientists who have won the Nobel Prize in Physics, Chemistry, or Medicine in the past century. Then, perhaps, their leaders could stop their Israel-bashing and Jew-baiting.

They might also read George Gilder’s latest book The Israel Test. Gilder, who is not Jewish, says Israel is a wonderful test for everyone. Do we envy and resent this people?

Do we covet what they have produced? Do we want to emulate their productivity and creative genius, or do we darkly ascribe their feats to a “Zionist” protocol? Gilder holds up a mirror to anti-Semites everywhere. What do you see?

When we first read that "Outreach to Muslims" was the next endeavor of NASA, it was like "What did we just read?" We thought it came from Obama and sure enough the White House and NASA reportedly are standing behind NASA's administrator for saying that his "foremost" mission is to reach out to the Muslim world according to media outlets. We should not have been surprised as Obama did say in 2009:

"And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples."

Facts are that with around 6 million Muslims, we are the 34th largest Muslim country. How Obama came up with the United States would be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world is anyone's guess. Guess Obama missed the part in history that we are a Judeo/Christian Nation.

Since Obama stated during the campaign "I have visited all 57 States" maybe it is the other '7' states who have all the Muslims? We cannot fathom anyone raised in America not knowing we have '50' states. Maybe that statement during the campaign should have been a clue to voters that this Senator from Illinois may not be someone who was raised as an American. With so little investigating by the press even after the gaffes like that, we still don't know.

Cannot even fathom what NASA employees are thinking about the President and the NASA Administrator today. All these years these men and women have worked toward the goal of exploring further into space, but now are told their next mission is to the Middle East. What a comedown from the lofty heights of space to the deserts of the Arab lands. Excuse me but this is like a "Beam me Up Scotty moment." What a waste of our tax dollars.

Ken Blackwell does a great job of capturing the abject stupidity of this outreach by Obama and Bolden in his editorial:

Obama's "Fly Me to the Crescent Moon" Policy
Ken Blackwell
July 11, 2010

Maybe it’s the Dog Days of Summer. Perhaps it’s the heat—102 degrees in Washington—that’s getting to peoples’ heads. But President Obama’s latest policy—announced by his NASA administrator, astronaut Charles Bolden, is about to melt down.


Speaking on the Arabic language network al-Jazeera, Bolden said Mr. Obama had given him his marching orders for NASA: Get American kids re-inspired to do better in math and science. Work on international cooperation. And, perhaps most important: find ways to “reach out” to the Muslim world to affirm their strong contributions to science and engineering.

First, we have to consider that President Obama is gutting NASA’s budget. He has scrapped the Constellation Program that would take Americans back to the Moon. There are possible resources there that could help all of us on earth with our energy needs. Former Sen. Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the Moon, says we could mine the Helium-3 that is abundant beneath the lunar surface and use it for nuclear fusion. Perhaps, perhaps not, but we are unlikely to know if we’re not going back there.

Second, why should American kids be excited about math and science when Administrator Bolden confesses that the U.S. can no longer even put astronauts in low earth orbit without help from other nations? President Kennedy led this nation to the Moon, but President Obama is teaching us to look inward. Under this administration, NASA has been grounded.

Third, this “outreach” to Muslims by NASA is, well, lunacy. Telling Muslims that they once led the world in science and technology is wonderful. They did. But that was before murderous mullahs took over control of Muslim societies and threatened with death anyone who didn’t toe the line of theocratic control.

Read More at Town Hall

Frank Gaffney: Farewell to Space

Yesterday when we saw the article about NASA Chief Bolden talking about the next frontier for NASA was reaching out to Muslims, we reread the article to make sure what we read was correct. Then we searched for more sources and they all said the same thing.

If anyone had any doubts about the agenda of Barack Obama, they should have no more doubts. He favors spending our tax dollars on outreach to members of Islam in Muslim nations while cancelling major parts of our space program. That says it all to any thinking person.

Words fail at what we would like to post but suffice it say that this is wrong to spend dollars allocated for Space Exploration to reach out to Muslims who many members of Islam want to see this Country destroyed. Is this President one of those? It is a fair question after what we have been seeing out of this White House. He was not raised as a typical American and his favoring the Muslim countries over our allies or even American citizens is not going over well in most parts of the Country.

Questions on a lot of our minds that need answers

Who is the real Barack Obama?
Was he eligible to run for President since he refuses to submit the paperwork showing he was eligible?
Did he ever formally change his name from Barry Sorento?
Did he attend Columbia University using their overseas program to attend college overseas to graduate and is that why no one remembers him at Columbia?
Why was Obama in the 2004 Senate race referred to as a son of Kenya?

The American people deserve answers to these questions which if answered truthfully would tell all we need to know about Barack Obama. We are not holding our breath that the national news media will find out the answers to those questions. Why is anyone running for President allowed to close their records which should be an open book? If you don't want people to know about you, don't run.

Suing Arizona for following the law today and yesterday wasting our tax dollars to fund the space program to reach out to Islam is not what an 'true' American President would do.

Frank Gaffney: Farewell to SpaceJuly 6, 2010

Just when you thought Barack Obama's toadying to Islam could not get any worse, now comes this: The President directed the new administrator of NASA, retired Marine Major General Charles Bolden, as "perhaps [his] foremost" charge to "find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage more dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science...and math and engineering."

This comment came in an interview the NASA chief conducted with al-Jazeera while touring the Middle East to mark the first anniversary of Mr. Obama's much-ballyhooed Cairo paean to Muslims. Bolden elaborated, "It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)."

In an address to the American University in Cairo, Bolden added that Mr. Obama has "asked NASA to change...by reaching out to ‘nontraditional' partners and strengthening our cooperation in the Middle East, North Africa, Southeast Asia and in particular in Muslim-majority nations." He declared that "NASA is not only a space exploration agency, but also an Earth improvement agency."

Now, when one thinks of the "contributions" to our space program that are possible from Muslim nations, the one that comes to mind is the literal kind - recycled petrodollars - since their "contributions to science, math and engineering" for several hundreds of years have been, to put it charitably, underwhelming.

Continue Reading...

Senators Demand Explanation of NASA's Flawed Climate Data and the Relation to Offshore Drilling

"We shouldn't make decisions affecting millions of American jobs when the data isn't credible," Barrasso told FoxNews.com.

That quote by Senator Barrasso says it all and why there should be no Cap and Trade legislation this year or next year. It should be dead and buried and any Republican jumping on board to try and pass an energy bill on flawed data needs to see the door. No decision can be made on a bill like cap and trade or any other energy bill without validation of the data. In this case it seems all the data is pretty well junk as the some of the climate scientists at NASA tweaked some numbers to fit their political agenda.

Every person involved in this flawed data fiasco at NASA needs FIRED! Their data could cost the American people huge dollars especially with the Democrats, one independent, and one Republican trying to continue Cap and Trade legislation. Someone needs to tell Lindsey Graham to stop this nonsense now and help block the bill instead of trying to get it passed for Obama.

If you are asking why we are comparing what is going on with the flawed data being used to push Cap and Trade and Offshore Drilling, we are about to answer that question as we believe it is related.

This idea that Obama is going to open the Virginia coast and other coastal areas to possible drilling we believe is nothing more then a ruse to bring in Republicans to vote for Cap and Trade. It takes many months to years to explore, find the oil/natural gas and set up the oil platform before drilling brings in the oil or natural gas. It is not a simple build a platform and start drilling as you have to locate the source before you build the platform and go into operation of drilling and producing from an offshore well. By that time Obama can change his mind 100 times or give the oil lease to CITGO which we think is a distinct possibility since it would make Chavez very happy and then he would allow drilling. Call us very suspicious about this whole deal.

Why did the Democrats in Congress allow the offshore oil ban expire which stood for 30 years? Who was behind allowing the ban to expire in Congress? Answer that question and you will discover who is set to make millions and probably billions off the operation. Our guess is George Soros who funds a lot of Democrat activities and expects paybacks with their votes.

Remember Obama "loaning" money to Brazil's Petrobras to drill off their coast and then discovering that George Soros is a huge investor in Petrobras (Aug 19, 2009 ... Billionaire George Soros bought $811 million stake in Petrobras in the second quarter).

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars ($10B) to Brazil’s state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil’s Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil’s planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan. Excerpt: Read More at Wall Street Journal

Interior Secretary Salazar has already said no offshore drilling until 2013 so what gives?

The Obama administration’s six-month delay in approving new offshore drilling leases in federal waters will become a new three-year ban, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar quietly told reporters last Friday. Which means that no new oil and gas leases will be approved during President Obama’s term even though two –thirds of the American public supports such activity, according to a December 2009 Rasmussen poll. Read more at the Washington Examiner

We suspect this offshore drilling is another phony statement by Obama to garner votes like the Executive Order on Abortion he signed which is worthless. Maybe he will prove us wrong, but we doubt that. No way is this President going to stick with drilling off Virginia when his environmentalist base gets done with him.

We believe that Obama is saying one thing to lure in Republicans while his Interior Secretary Salazar follows up with his comments. Perfect example was Obama announcement on offshore possibly being opened and the March 31st statement by Salazar:

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar said Wednesday that the U.S. will not achieve energy independence through offshore drilling alone.

“We don’t believe that we are ever going to drill our way to energy independence,” said Salazar in a conference call with reporters. Source: AP

Another question that is not being answered in the current discussion is how much will the Federal Government charge for the oil leases and then tax the companies that do win the leases and drill? Does this Administration want to make the price of American crude oil sold higher then what we can import from the Middle East or Venezuela?

The last thing this economy needs is Cap and Trade. We have three Senators out in front on this fight against cap and trade -- Senators Jim Inofe (R-OK), David Vitter (R-LA), and John Barrasso (R-WY). We have to believe there are some sensible Democrats from oil/gas states like Mary Landrieu that can see through this smoke and mirrors and will join Republicans minus Lindsey Graham in defeating Cap and Trade.

If Obama truly believes that planes leave a carbon footprint then why does he fly on Air Force One so much? Why did his family fly on the taxpayer's nickle for spring break in New York? We have a recommendation: "Stay in the White House and save on the carbon footprints if you believe they are hurting the environment."

Updated March 31, 2010
Senators Demand Explanation of NASA's Flawed Climate Data
By Jeremy A. Kaplan
- FOXNews.com

Senators John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and David Vitter (R-La.) have written a letter to NASA chief Charles Bolden demanding answers to questions surrounding newly uncovered irregularities in the space agency's climate data.



Maps from NASA's GISS reveal temperatures where no data exist, thanks to mathematical extrapolation of data.
____________________________________________________

Not everyone is sipping the global warming Kool-Aid.

Concerns about the validity of NASA's climate research are being raised following revelations that the space agency admitted its data was less accurate than other weather trackers'. Disturbed by these reports, as well as the growing Climate-gate scandal that has left global-warming theorists reeling, Senators John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and David Vitter (R-La.) have written a letter to space agency chief Charles Bolden demanding answers.
"The American people deserve to learn the truth about the data," Barrasso told FoxNews.com, stressing the risks of basing public policy on science that remains largely undecided.

FoxNews.com has obtained an advance copy of the letter -- the third that Barrasso, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Oversight for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Vitter, ranking member of the Committee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, have written in the months following the Climate-gate scandal.
Writing that "American data is partially derived from the corrupted data set that has been criticized as too political and unscientific as a result of the Climate-gate scandal," the senators have invited Bolden to testify before the Senate on the credibility of NASA's data.

"Their efforts to attack the science of climate change may be politically motivated. I see nothing in the NASA/GISS data that suggests anything other than an honest effort to discover the scientific truth about the Earth's temperature record," Barrasso says.

When contacted for comment, NASA had still not received the letter, but a spokesman for the space agency was awaiting to the Senators' comments. "NASA has not received the letter," NASA spokesman Michael Cabbage said. "We look forward to working with the senators to respond to their concerns."
Read Senator Barrasso's letter to NASA

Excerpt: Read More at Fox News

related links
Achtung! Germans Giving Up on Global Warming
Embattled U.N. Climate Chief Apologizes Again, Won't Resign
NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

Climategate Stunner: NASA Heads Knew NASA Data Was Poor, Then Used Data from CRU

UPDATE 3/12/10: Pajamas Media has a new interview on their site with Chris Horner, CEI, org. USA Today had an admission from NASA that their data was suspect and never made the USA Today. Horner had a FOI request to NASA for two years they stalled and in the UK it was four years. MUST SEE interview at: http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=video&video-id=3230

******

Who can be trusted on climate data? When you learn that people inside NASA doubted their own data and then lied about, you realize that NASA has a huge problem of credibility. Why didn't all of this come out years ago instead of keeping on the same path of using data they didn't trust? With all this evidence the Obama and the EPA are still trying to sell the political agenda of Global Warming disaster awaits.

The credibility within the climatology scientific world is shot. It is going to take a lot of facts and evidence for them to get even a shred of credibility back. What they have done to their fellow scientists should get them kicked to the curb and no longer be in charge of anything more then taking out the trash. They need to work their way back up in their field starting at the bottom. Maybe then they will learn how important it is to have the data that cannot be disputed instead of a political agenda.

Even more disgusting is that all of this was known by a reporter in August 2007 who sat on the story. Did his editor or publisher kill the story? Not only does the scientific community have a problem but so does the media. Politics needs taken out of news stories to be replaced by media members at all levels who report facts, not spin, their personal opinion or a political agenda.

Read this and ask yourself why NASA personnel have not been fired.

Climategate Stunner: NASA Heads Knew NASA Data Was Poor, Then Used Data from CRU
New emails from James Hansen and Reto Ruedy (download PDF here) show that NASA's temperature data was doubted within NASA itself, and was not independent of CRU's embattled data, as has been claimed.

March 10, 2010 - by Charlie Martin

Email messages obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute via a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that the climate dataset of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was considered — by the top climate scientists within NASA itself — to be inferior to the data maintained by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU).

The NASA scientists also felt that NASA GISS data was inferior to the National Climate Data Center Global Historical Climate Network (NCDC GHCN) database.
These emails, obtained by Christopher Horner, also show that the NASA GISS dataset was not independent of CRU data.

Further, all of this information regarding the accuracy and independence of NASA GISS data was directly communicated to a reporter from USA Today in August 2007.
The reporter never published it.
—————————————
There are only four climate datasets available. All global warming study, such as the reports from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), must be based on these four.

They are: the NASA GISS dataset, the NCDC GHCN dataset, the CRU dataset, and the Japan Meteorological Agency dataset.

Following Climategate, when it became known that raw temperature data for CRU’s “HADCRU3″ climate dataset had been destroyed, Phil Jones, CRU’s former director, said the data loss was not important — because there were other independent climate datasets available.

But the emails reveal that at least three of the four datasets were not independent, that NASA GISS was not considered to be accurate, and that these quality issues were known to both top climate scientists and to the mainstream press.

In a response to reporter Doyle Rice of USA Today, Dr. Reto Ruedy — a senior scientist at NASA — recommended the following:

Continue using NCDC’s data for the U.S. means and Phil Jones’ [HADCRU3] data for the global means. …

We are basically a modeling group and were forced into rudimentary analysis of global observed data in the 70s and early 80s. …

Now we happily combine NCDC’s and Hadley Center data to … evaluate our model results.

This response was extended later the same day by Dr. James Hansen — the head of NASA GISS:

[For] example, we extrapolate station measurements as much as 1200 km. This allows us to include results for the full Arctic. In 2005 this turned out to be important, as the Arctic had a large positive temperature anomaly. We thus found 2005 to be the warmest year in the record, while the British did not and initially NOAA also did not. …

It should be noted that the different groups have cooperated in a very friendly way to try to understand different conclusions when they arise.

Two implications of these emails: The data to which Phil Jones referred to as “independent” was not — it was being “corrected” and reused among various climate science groups, and the independence of the results was no longer assured; and the NASA GISS data was of lower quality than Jones’ embattled CRU data.

The NCDC GHCN dataset mentioned in the Ruedy email has also been called into question by Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts. D’Aleo and Watts showed in a January 2010 report that changes in available measurement sites and the selection criteria involved in “homogenizing” the GHCN climate data raised serious questions about the usefulness of that dataset as well.

These three datasets — from NASA GISS, NCDC GHCN, and CRU — are the basis of essentially all climate study supporting anthropogenic global warming.

Charlie Martin is a Colorado computer scientist and freelance writer. He holds an MS in Computer Science from Duke University, where he spent six years with the National Biomedical Simulation Resource, Duke University Medical Center. Find him at http://chasrmartin.com, and on his blog at http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/.

Source: Pajamas Media