Life at the Top
By Dennis Bauer,
www.dennisbauer.com
Most
people want to be at the top. “See you at the top.” “Top o’ the mornin’.”
“Mountaintop experience.” “Can you top this?” “At the top of his game.”
If you had been with me that last
weekend in May a few years back, you would have felt the snow crunch under
your boots, you would have seen the bright sun and breathed the thin air,
and you would have stood against the 60 mile an hour wind as you stood on
top of 14,410’ Mt. Rainier, the 5th highest mountain in America
(not including Alaska). And do you know what’s at the top?
Nothing! Snow, ice, rock …that’s about
it. Nothing really grows there. There are no delicate orchids, no fragrant
roses …not even the lowly dandelion grows there. Life is not on the mountain
top.
Do you know where life is? Life is in
the valleys. The valleys …where sometimes you slog through the mires and
bogs, the forests and fogs, and you can’t see very far ahead or even know
what direction you face. But there …right there …is where life is. Life is
not on the mountain tops. Life is in the valleys.
Valleys aren’t always fun. Layoffs,
cutbacks, budget shortfalls, staffing challenges …if you’re there, you know
you would never call that a mountain top experience. Losing a job is a very
deep valley indeed. One of life’s greatest challenges is finding perspective
when it’s dark and you can see neither the forest nor the trees. And yet,
the experiences of so many who have been there before you teach you that
going through these valleys will, in the end, enrich you with the beauty and
fragrance of a very full life. But the process is never fun.
You need two things to get you through
the valleys of life. The first thing you need is determination.
Determination is what rolls you over in the morning when the alarm clock
goes off so early and, feel like it or not, you plant your feet on the
floor.
The second thing you need is endurance.
Endurance is what makes you plant your feet on floor morning after morning
after morning after morning after……
If you’ve been there, you know what I’m
talking about. If you’re there right now, give thanks! If you haven’t been
there yet, prepare.
I believe we should give thanks for the
valleys of our lives because that’s where you grow.
Life is not on the mountain tops. Life
is in the valleys.
Back to top
_____________________________________________________
Penn State Probe into Mann's Wrongdoing a 'Total
Whitewash'
By Ed Barnes, FOXNews.com

Penn State's probe that mostly cleared climate change
scientist Michael Mann for any wrongdoing doesn't begin to scratch the
surface, say critics.
How thoroughly
did Penn State University investigate a top climate scientist who brought
hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to the school? A growing number
of critics say they hardly looked at all.
Penn State ended a two-month probe into the
work of Michael Mann, a top climate scientist whose "hockey stick" graph of
climbing world temperature helped galvanize support for the climate change
movement, on Wednesday.
The probe stemmed
from the release of thousands of hacked e-mails from a server at the
Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England
that showed the internal debate and, some say, the manipulation of data, to
support the scientific underpinnings of the case for global, man-made
warming of the planet. Mann's e-mails were among those released and critics
charged that he used "tricks" to make his data match studies that confirmed
warming trends.
A three-person board of inquiry cleared Mann
of three of four charges brought by the university that he falsified or
tried to destroy data, and recommended further study on the fourth charge
that his methods "deviated from accepted practices" of the scientific
community.
They wrote in their report that "that there
exists no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had ever engaged in, or
participated in, directly or indirectly, any actions with intent to delete,
conceal or otherwise destroy e-mails, information and/or data."
But the findings and, more importantly, the
focus have set off a wave of criticism accusing the university panel of
failing to interview key people, neglecting to conduct more than a cursory
review of allegations and structuring the inquiry so that the outcome --
exoneration -- was a foregone conclusion.
On Friday, Rep. Darrell Issa, the ranking
Republican on the House Investigations Committee, charged that the Penn
State's failure to settle all the charges and called into question professor
Mann's work. He is demanding that all grants to the noted scientist be
frozen.
Mann, according
to published reports, has gotten a grant almost $550,000 in stimulus money
to study climate change and is part of a nearly $2 million grant to Penn
State to study the impact of climate change on various diseases.
"Until the investigation is completed,"
Issa said, "the National Science Foundation should immediately freeze all
grants and funding, including the $541,184 stimulus grant, to Professor
Mann."
Criticism
directed at the conduct of the investigation is being spearheaded by Steven
Milloy, a former Fox News contributor and publisher of Junk Science, a Web
site dedicated to debunking global warming research.
"It was set up to be a total whitewash and
the panel made no effort to investigate," Milloy said. "They didn't even
interview the recipients of the e-mails. It is ridiculous."
He charges that the panel did little more
than look at the e-mails Mann sent and that, despite claims that "hundreds
of hours" of time had been put into the investigation, only two people were
actually interviewed. "None of them had any direct knowledge of the
e-mails," he said.
"The only interviews cited in the report
other than Mann's are with Jerry North and Donald Kennedy," he said. "Both
are Mann's supporters and none have anything to do with the charges. Kennedy
was the editor of Science magazine, and North helped Mann defend the 'hockey
stick' graph. Yet Phil Jones, who got the e-mails, wasn't contacted."
Steve McIntyre
of the Web site
Climate Audit also charged that the panel
looked at papers that were already publicly available. "They did not examine
any of Mann's correspondence that was not already in the public record," he
said. In effect, he argued, the panel didn't use any of its investigatory
powers to plumb deeper.
Pennsylvania's Commonwealth Foundation, a
conservative research and educational institute, proposed that the state
legislature conduct an independent investigation of the charges and Mann's
research.
A spokesman for the foundation said it was
a "conflict of interest" for Penn State to investigate itself. Republican
State Rep. RoseMarie Swanger also called for a separate investigation to be
conducted by the state.
Graduate School Dean Henry C. Foley, who
headed the investigation, referred all calls on the subject to media
representatives for the school, who failed to return phone calls.
Back to top
______________________________________________________________
Becca
Robison - A Teenager Changing the World
From
the pages of
Inspire Me Today™
Becca is the founder and
president of AstroTots, which offers free science camps for girls ages 4-10.
II am often asked what made me able to accomplish
the things I have at my age. My answer is simple. I was willing to
try. I'm a regular teenager. I wouldn't consider myself gifted,
special, or anything else. I'm just someone who thinks "I can."
Sometimes that's it all it takes. I have done lectures and
workshops for young people all over the country and the greatest
ideas I've 
heard have come from other youth. Sometimes those great ideas
never take flight because the kids who came up with them are
looking at all the reasons that they can't make it happen instead
of all the reasons they can! Thinking that you "can"- will soon
turn into believing that you "can." And once you believe it - it
will begin to happen for you. There are emotional, physical and
financial resources available for kids want to do something great
for their communities. Volunteers and mentors are out there who
share your dream and are willing to step up and help. They are
just looking for someone with a vision. I know as kids we say
"when I grow up I want to be..." I'm here to say, START NOW! You
don't have to wait until you grow up to make a difference in this
world. And isn't that what we all want to do? Make the world a
better place? I believe with all my heart that we design our own
futures. We have the power to make things happen for ourselves.
Some worry that someone won't "let" them do what they want to do.
Do your research, show people why you can. You don't need
permission from anyone but yourself to step up and make a
difference. If you believe in yourself, and your abilities, others
will too. Your passion and belief in yourself will bring the
resources and support you need to make it happen.
I'm not saying that there won't be a few roadblocks. One of
mine included a rare and aggressive bone tumor! But drawing from
the lessons I had learned starting a non-profit as a pre-teen I
found the strength to realize that even that setback was
temporary. It was vital to me to get back to my project
astrotots.org as soon as possible because it helped me see
myself as whole again, even if it was from a wheelchair at first.
Now I'm back on my feet, walking without assistance. We all have
heard the old saying "keep your eye on the prize." That works for
me. I know what the end result is that I want, and I believe it
can happen. That has brought me results every time.
Don't wait to be asked. Be the person who ACTS. You know you
have it in you. As I said before, all it takes to make a
difference in your community, your country and your world is to be
the person who is willing to try. After that, everything else
falls into place.
Becca Robison, 17, is a sophomore at
Weber State University majoring in Electrical Engineering and
Physics. Part of their unique Early College program, she will
receive her Associates degree when she graduates high school. She
plans to transfer to a science and engineering school after
graduation. Particularly interested in astronomy, she was
surprised to find that many girls still consider aerospace a “boys
job.”
This motivated her to create AstroTots,
a free science camp for girls ages 4 – 10 whose main target is
girls in “at risk” areas to encourage an early love of the
sciences. It is her belief that science education can be the path
out of poverty. These camps, run completely by grants and donation
money have spread across the country and even internationally.
Her passion for science was deepened
this past year when she was diagnosed with a rare and aggressive
bone tumor. She credits science for saving her leg and quite
possibly her life. Not letting this setback stop her, she began
doing her camps from her wheelchair only eight weeks after her
surgery! As determined about her recovery as she is about her
camps, she is now walking without assistance!
 |
Media & speaking opportunities: |
 |
The New York Times, PEOPLE, TeenPEOPLE, Inspire Magazine, Do
Something Magazine, and others. |
 |
Miley Cyrus’s 16th Birthday Bash in Disneyland. Selected YSA
Service Star spokesperson for media interviews as well as a
personal interview that was shown on the Jumbotrons during the
concert. |
 |
Convocation Speaker at the Founders Convocation for Russell
Sage College for Women. September 2008. |
 |
National Science Education Symposium “Science Generation” -
held in April 2008 at the Museum of Natural History in NYC.
(Other speakers included Speaker Newt Gingrich and Discover
Channel star Neil Degrasse.) |
 |
Speaker for Advanta Corp Bring Your Kids to Work Day April
2008 |
|
Back to top
______________________________________________________________
Climategate U-turn as scientist at center of
dispute admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
By Jonathan Petre
The academic at the center of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose
raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he
has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has
refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost
the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in
the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that
his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is
‘not as good as it should be’.
The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’
used by climate change advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the
world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may
not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no
‘statistically significant’ warming.
The admissions will be seized on by skeptics as fresh
evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate
change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely
man-made.
Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped
down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit
after the leaking of emails that skeptics claim show scientists were
manipulating data.
The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations
around the world and analyzed by his unit, has been used for years to
bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been
accused of ‘scientific fraud’ for allegedly deliberately suppressing
information and refusing to share vital data with critics.
Discussing the interview, the BBC’s environmental analyst
Roger Harrabin said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had
told him that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not
record-keeping and office tidying.
Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC’s
website, said the professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces
of data from around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature
change.
That material has been used to produce the ‘hockey stick
graph’ which is relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in
recent decades.
According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones
said ‘his office is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years,
tens of thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he
took in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper
go because he never realized that 20 years later he would be held to account
over them’.
Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones
admitted the lack of organization in the system had contributed to his
reluctance to share data with critics, which he regretted.
But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the
scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were
predominantly man-made.
Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There
is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have
come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.
‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything
is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then
issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we
have to improve more.’
He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar
warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be
explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.
He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no
‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip
rather than the long-term trend.
And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even
warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high
temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer
between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high
temperatures in northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only
applying to the northern part of the world.
Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much
debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not.
The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North
Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
‘For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in
more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There
are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
‘Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or
warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be
unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm
than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.’
Skeptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the
IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could
have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than
now.
Professor Jones criticized those who complained he had not shared his
data with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly
available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled ‘until
recently – and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend’.
Mr Harrabin told Radio 4’s Today program that, despite the controversies,
there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the majority scientific
view that climate change was largely man-made.
But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the skeptical Global Warming Policy
Foundation, said Professor Jones’s ‘excuses’ for his failure to share data
were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and ‘mates’.
He said that until all the data was released, skeptics could not test it
to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.
He added that the professor’s concessions over medieval warming were
‘significant’ because they were his first public admission that the science
was not settled.
Back to top
______________________________________________________________
NOAA Scientists Unraveling El Niño’s
Mysteries
New Clues Found in Stratosphere, Troposphere and
Arctic Vortex
Like a stone tossed in a pond, El
Niño’s appearance
in the Pacific Ocean has ripple effects that extend
around the world.
A natural phenomenon, El Niño (Spanish for
“the little boy”) refers to occasional periods of sea
surface temperature warming in the tropical Pacific
that influence the world’s weather patterns.
El Niño is known for stirring up weather across the globe:
However, unlike concentric rings expanding across a pond’s
surface, El Niño’s ripples do not follow a simple pattern. They are highly
complex, capable of altering atmospheric features from the surface of the
ocean to miles above the Earth.
New Pieces to the Puzzle
NOAA scientists are studying El Niño’s effects to better
understand not only how El Niño influences our weather, but also to separate
natural El Niño fluctuations from human-caused climate change. The array of
variables involved — ocean temperature, air temperature, ocean currents,
winds at various altitudes, air pressure, to name a few — add to the
challenge.
A new study by Melissa Free and Dian Seidel, climate
scientists in NOAA’s Air Resources Laboratory in Silver Spring, Md., helps
connect some of the pieces in the El Niño puzzle. Their work, published in
the December 2009 Journal of Geophysical Research, traces one
subset of El Niño ripples from the Pacific Ocean to the stratosphere above
the Arctic, and then on to Europe where the phenomenon tends to make winters
colder.
Free and Seidel’s work is part of an emerging area of
interest for climate and weather researchers investigating how the
stratosphere — a
layer of
the atmosphere beginning about five miles above sea level — influences
weather at ground level. The stratospheric layer of the atmosphere is
located above the troposphere.
The troposphere begins at the Earth's
surface and extends up to 4-12 miles (6-20 km) high. This is where we live.
The stratosphere begins above the troposphere and extends
up to 31 miles above the Earth's surface. This layer holds 19 percent of the
atmosphere's gases but very little water vapor. Scientists are just
beginning to learn how conditions in the stratosphere echo downward into the
troposphere and affect weather.
Free and Seidel decided to look specifically at El Niño’s
ability to influence weather at the ground level by first triggering changes
several miles up.
A Need to Learn More
In recent years, scientists have found a connection
between another atmospheric feature, swirling upper-level winds called the
Arctic vortex, and colder than average winters in Europe. Studying
data collected since 1958, Free and Seidel confirmed links between El Niño,
the cooling of the tropical stratosphere and the warming of the Arctic
stratosphere — three factors that also influence the Arctic vortex.
Scientists have long known about El Niño’s effect on
temperatures in the lowest part of the atmosphere, but its effects on the
stratosphere have only recently become clearer through studies like this
one.
Industries affected by severe weather, droughts or floods
— agriculture, cargo shipping and transportation — pay close attention to El
Niño. With further study, scientists are confident that we will improve our
understanding of El Niño and, ultimately, our ability to prepare for its
effects.
Back to top
______________________________________________________________