In June of 2010 I wrote several pieces about Columnist Jonah Goldberg and his outrageous statements about oil being the really true green fuel. This theme of his surfaces from time to time when he has trouble coming up with equally outrageous things to say in his column. The whale to which I refer in the title of this blog is the whoppers and half truths he tells. This Saturday, April 30 he drew a blank again and is making more ridiculous statements. He starts out saying that the green environmental community has realized that the fight against climate change has fizzled. He states President Obama's "sweeping" efforts to make good on his promise to turn back rising oceans was a total flop. Instead the push for clean energy, clean air and reversal of global warming only succeeded in losing jobs and causing the price of gasoline to go out of sight. Really? His reasons for this bogus statement are the whoppers.

Why are we Stimulating Europe's & China's Economy? Because we have been so slow adopting alternative energies, Chinese and European companies have been sucking up all of the stimulus money being spent on wind power generating technology. The same can be said for solar power. In Arizona alone two new solar farms are in the works with the equipment coming from China...

These funds should have had strings attached requiring the equipment to come from the US. There are US companies, like GE, making this wind turbines and solar collectors. Instead, jobs were created in Germany, France and China.

I applaud the stimulus in so far as it helped our companies and our people.  But why  we should give it to other countries is baffling. Acting in haste to get the economy back on track seemed a good thing. But to act without thinking through the consequences is unconscionable.

Aside from being a stupid name for a non-news event, it really is irrelevant to global warming. A hacker commits an illegal act and steals e-mails. Why would they do that and why should we care? Is there a world wide conspiracy of scientists? Hardly..

Thomas Friedman, author of Hot, Flat, and Crowded has it right. His attitude toward global warming deniers makes sense to me. His position is that we should react to events of low probability but with high impact in the same way we react to the low probability of Al-Qaida obtaining an atomic bomb, which would have a very high impact should it happen...