Lord of the Ring: Obamas wedding band carries the first half of the Shahada.

“There is no God except Allah”

His “Christian” faith, a big haha.

The gold ring is the proof.

His profession a spoof.

Allegiance is with his mullah.

 

There has been much speculation about why Obama wore a golden ring on his wedding finger already as a student at Occidental. Later at his wedding, his bride gave him the same (or very similar) ring as a token. It carries the inscription: La Ilaha Illallah.

Egyptian-born Islamic scholar Mark A. Gabriel, Ph.D.  explained that on Obama’s ring, the declaration “There is no god except Allah” (La Ilaha Illallah) is inscribed in two sections, one above the other.

On the upper section, “There is no god” is written in Arabic letters, from right to left: Lam, Alif, Alif, Lam, Ha.

On the lower section is “except god,” written in Arabic letters from right to left: Alif, Lam, Alif, Alif, Lam, Lam, Ha.

In the lower section, the word “Allah” is written partially on top of the word “except,” noted Gabriel, the author of “Islam and Terrorism” and “Journey Inside the Mind of an Islamic Terrorist.”

It is common in Islamic art and Arabic calligraphy, especially when expressing Quranic messages on jewelry, to artfully place letters on top of each other to fit them into the allotted space.

Excerpt from http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/obamas-ring-there-is-no-god-but-allah/

The story made it to Al-Arabiya this morning: http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/10/12/243401.html

It is common in the middle east to wear a ring with either a part of the Shahada or the full Shahada to protect against evil Jinns.

Unemployment rate down to 7.8% BLS own adjustments shows otherwise, but they report it anyway,

The good news yesterday was: Unemployment down to 7.8%!!!

In a month when nothing happened that could possibly explain this sudden and totally unexpected improvement, one has to ask: What happened?

I went to the Bureau of Labor Statistics official website: http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ces_cps_trends.pdf and picked up the real story.

In it they show that the payroll survey showed an increase of 114000 jobs and the household survey a giant one month increase of 873000 jobs, a number not seen since the Reagan recovery in the eighties.

The household survey yields a volatile number for a variety of reasons: It only samples 60000 households, and what constitutes employment is not well defined.

Aware of this, the BLS is developing an adjusted household survey employment number with the following definition: This is a research series created from household survey employment to be more similar in concept and definition to payroll survey employment. Household survey employment is adjusted by subtracting agriculture and related employment, nonagricultural self employed, unpaid family workers, private household workers, and workers absent without pay from their jobs, and then adding nonagricultural wage and salary multiple jobholders. The effects of population control revisions also have been smoothed out in the historical data in this series.

This adjusted number showed an increase of 294000 jobs, very good, but a far cry from the 873000 jobs the unadjusted survey indicated

The discrepancy is 579000 jobs, enough to state that the most probable official unemployment number should have remained at 8.1%.

 

A new record for ice cover in Antarctica. More CO2, please.

A record is set for Antarctica’s ice (1)

A truth inconvenient, but this will suffice. (2)

To nix the decision

“Curb carbon emission” (3)

CO2 is the gas to grow corn, wheat and rice. (4)

(1)    The total ice cover in Antarctica set a new all time record. According to NOAA’s Sea Ice Extent it turns out day 265 set an all time record, and then day 266 (Sept 22nd) broke that record. Days 265 through 270 are now the 6 highest Antarctic Sea Ice Extent’s of all time (in the satellite record)! 11 of the top 15 extents are now in 2012.

(2)  A) In the Antarctic, at the time of maximum sea ice extents, the “edge” of the sea ice very closely approximates a “crown” around the continent between latitudes 60 south and 62 south. At those latitudes, ANY increase in Antarctic Sea Ice extents will significantly increase energy reflections from the ice, and reduce the absorption of energy from the sun into the newly covered ocean waters. The result – of ANTARCTIC sea ice maximums expanding – is increased heat loss from the earth into space, and decreased global temperatures.

B) In the Arctic, on the other hand, all of the sea ice is now concentrated in a single “Beanie” cap around the north pole. This cap can be very closely approximated as a cap extending from the pole down to latitude 80 degrees (for 4 million km^2 sea ice) or to 81 degrees for today’s 3.4 million km^2 sea ice extents.

However, at those very high latitudes, during the time of minimum sea ice extents at the equinox, more energy is lost from the exposed ocean surface by radiation into space and evaporation (both of which will begin as soon as the sea ice “insulation” is melted out) than is gained by the ocean surface absorbing sunlight. NOTE: This effect, the reverse of the conventional CAGW alarmism about sea ice albedo! – is ONLY true for the far north latitudes. But, then again, those are the only latitudes where sea ice exists at the present minimum, so it is pointless and distracting and wrong to worry about any other latitudes …. FOR ARCTIC SEA ICE.

(3)    Conventional “wisdom” according to IPCC dictates that there is a strong positive feedback between CO2 levels and global temperatures, so that a doubling of CO2 would yield a global temperature increase of between 3 and 5 degree Celsius. If there was no gain in the system, a doubling of CO2 levels would cause a 0.9 degree increase. However, there is a strong negative feedback due to changes in the cloud cover and associated thunderstorms so the net effect is an increase of the global temperature of no more than 0.3 degree C. This can be verified by calculations using a simple observation of the earth’s temperature response to the varying amount of solar influx in the Northern and Southern Hemisphere over a year.

(4)    For every doubling of CO2 levels the trees, plants and grass will increase their growth by 30 to 70% dependent on the species. This effect will level off at about 1200 ppm, so we can use this effect to feed an additional two billion people, or alleviate the starving that is already occurring.

Conclusion: We need more CO2, not less, to help feed the world and  stave off the coming Ice-age for a little longer.

 

Tornadoes and hurricanes at a low thanks to increased CO2 levels? A Limerick.

Tornadoes and hurricanes: At a new low (1) (2)

The CO2 calms them, as far as we know (3)

So the crop yields increase (4)

And the starving will cease. (5)

More CO2, please, let the trees and plants grow. (6)

(1)    Total tornado activity in 2012 is way below normal, See fig.

(2)    The number of days since a major hurricane hit the U.S. mainland is at a record, 2523 days (and counting) since hurricane Wilma hit the Gulf Coast in 2005. This is the longest stretch since hurricane tracking begun.

(3)    This point is controversial. According to IPCC there is a positive feedback between greenhouse gases and temperature increase. This assumption is proven false by the absence of global temperature increase since 2001.

The opposite argument is true. There is a strong negative feedback between increasing CO2 and temperature, so the net effect is that the tropic experience almost no temperature increase, the Northern Hemisphere an increase of 0.4 degrees, and the Southern Hemisphere an increase of about 0.2 degree Celsius for a doubling of the CO2 concentration. This increase is concentrated mostly around the poles causing less of a temperature gradient between the poles and the equator, which give the storms less energy to sustain them.

Total hurricane energy is on a decline since the active years 2005-2006. 2012 is no exception with only one major hurricane (for 12 hours) way out in the Atlantic.

(4)     There is a strong correlation between CO2 concentration and crop yields, with a 30 to 70 % increase for a doubling of CO2.

(5)    Assuming a 50% average increase in yield the world can feed two billion more mouths with a doubling in CO2.

(6)    In addition, when CO2 increases the plants use photosynthesis more efficiently, needing less water to produce a crop making even arid areas able to yield a crop.