THE "OCEAN ACIDIFICATION" SCARE POLEAXED

Coral Calcification and Photosynthesis in a CO2-Enriched World of the Future

Many are the people who have predicted that rates of coral calcification, as well as the photosynthetic rates of their symbiotic algae, will dramatically decline in response to what they typically refer to as an acidification of the world's oceans, as the atmosphere's CO2 concentration continues to rise in the years, decades and centuries to come (see Calcification (Corals) in our Subject Index). As ever more pertinent evidence accumulates, however, the true story appears to be just the opposite of what these climate alarmists continue to tell us.

A case in point is the recent study of Herfort et al. (2008), who note that an increase in atmospheric CO2 will cause an increase in the abundance of HCO3- (bicarbonate) ions and dissolved CO2, and who report that several studies on marine plants have observed "increased photosynthesis with higher than ambient DIC [dissolved inorganic carbon] concentrations," citing the works of Gao et al. (1993), Weis (1993), Beer and Rehnberg (1997), Marubini and Thake (1998), Mercado et al. (2001, 2003), Herfort et al. (2002) and Zou et al. (2003).

To further explore this subject, and to see what it might imply for coral calcification, the three researchers employed a wide range of bicarbonate concentrations "to monitor the kinetics of bicarbonate use in both photosynthesis and calcification in two reef-building corals, Porites porites and Acropora sp." This work revealed that additions of HCO3- to synthetic seawater continued to increase the calcification rate of Porites porites until the bicarbonate concentration exceeded three times that of seawater, while photosynthetic rates of the coral's symbiotic algae were stimulated by HCO3- addition until they became saturated at twice the normal HCO3- concentration of seawater.

Similar experiments conducted on Indo-Pacific Acropora sp. showed that calcification and photosynthetic rates in these corals were enhanced to an even greater extent, with calcification continuing to increase above a quadrupling of the HCO3- concentration and photosynthesis saturating at triple the concentration of seawater. In addition, they monitored calcification rates of the Acropora sp. in the dark, and, in their words, "although these were lower than in the light for a given HCO3- concentration, they still increased dramatically with HCO3- addition, showing that calcification in this coral is light stimulated but not light dependent."

In discussing the significance of their findings, Herfort et al. suggest, as we have long contended (Idso et al., 2000), that "hermatypic corals incubated in the light achieve high rates of calcification by the synergistic action of photosynthesis [our italics]," which, as they have shown, is enhanced by elevated concentrations of HCO3- ions that come courtesy of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content.

As for the real-world implications of their work, the three researchers note that over the next century the predicted increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration "will result in about a 15% increase in oceanic HCO3-," and they say that this development "could stimulate photosynthesis and calcification in a wide variety of hermatypic corals." This well-supported conclusion stands in stark contrast to the outworn contention of the world's climate alarmists that continued increases in the air's CO2 content will, as restated by Herfort et al., "cause a reduction in coral growth and planktonic calcification." This claim, as they and many others have now demonstrated, is about as far from the truth as it could possibly be.

Source.

Note: My favourite Pilsener, Lubos Motl, also has a good demolition of the "ocean acidification" scare.

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, DISSECTING LEFTISM, GREENIE WATCH, OBAMA WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, EYE ON BRITAIN and Paralipomena . My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)

Prominent climate alarmist concedes (ungraciously) defeat to climate realist in rare debate

A debate between the Right Honourable The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley and Richard Littlemore of alarmist blog DeSmogBlog.com. Being intellectually outgunned by a senior member (A Viscount ranks above a Baron and below an Earl) of the hereditary British aristocracy must REALLY hurt. Note: DeSmogBlog's Littlemore is just the latest alarmist to get demolished like a tomato in a real debate. See U.S. Senate Report: Scientific Smackdown: Skeptics Voted The Clear Winners Against Global Warming Believers in Heated NYC Debate --March 16, 2007

See this website to listen to the August 17, 2008 full audio of debate of Monckton vs. Littlemore and read the comments confirming yet another stunning victory for those skeptical of a man-made claims catastrophe: Excerpt:

"I'd have to say that Monckton 'won' the debate. He came across as more prepared and had answers at his fingertips, whereas Richard appeared to verbally stumble on occasion."

In addition, this website sympathetic to Littlemore was brutal in it's view of the smackdown that Littlemore got from Monckton. Excerpt:

"I got the impression that Littlemore was engaging in the debate totally unprepared."

No wonder Al Gore has refused all challenges to debate global warming!

Excerpt from Littlemore's concession speech:

"In hindsight, I played perfectly into the hands of Monckton and his happy radio host, Roy Green, who share the same goal - not to win an argument about global warming science, but merely to show that there still IS an argument. Of course there's not. But while we danced angels around the head of a pin, I can imagine Green's listeners thinking, "Oh my. This is very confusing. No wonder the government says it's too early to take action." Score one for Monckton....

It was also a tactical error to start pointing people to helpful websites with clear graphs and reliable science that could support my position. It left open the possibility for Monckton to say, "I could produce 35 graphs" to the contrary - which fiction then drifted to the listeners as if it were, well, accurate in the real world.

Thanks (and my apologies) to those of you who volunteered some much-preferable debating strategies. Maybe next time.

Source

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, DISSECTING LEFTISM, GREENIE WATCH, OBAMA WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, EYE ON BRITAIN and Paralipomena . My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)

OBAMA VERSUS THOMAS: ONE MONTH LATER, THE WSJ AGREES WITH TAB

*******UPDATE: 10 HOURS LATER AND INSTAPUNDIT NOTICES. REGULAR READERS KNOW THAT WE SCOOP DA BLOGFADDA ALL THE TIME. SPREAD THE WORD!

WSJ:

By the time he was nominated, Clarence Thomas had worked in the Missouri Attorney General's office, served as an Assistant Secretary of Education, run the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and sat for a year on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation's second most prominent court. Since his "elevation" to the High Court in 1991, he has also shown himself to be a principled and scholarly jurist.

Meanwhile, as he bids to be America's Commander in Chief, Mr. Obama isn't yet four years out of the Illinois state Senate, has never held a hearing of note of his U.S. Senate subcommittee, and had an unremarkable record as both a "community organizer" and law school lecturer. Justice Thomas's judicial credentials compare favorably to Mr. Obama's Presidential résumé by any measure. And when it comes to rising from difficult circumstances, Justice Thomas's rural Georgian upbringing makes Mr. Obama's story look like easy street.

YUP.

AND WE MADE THIS ARGUMENT A MONTH AGO.

OBAMA'S FIRST DEFENSE IS ALWAYS A LIE

Presumptive Democrat nominee Barry Soetoro Senator Barack [middle name redacted] Obama responded to criticism of his pro-infanticide vote in the Illinois State Senate with a baldfaced lie. As reported by the New York Sun:

The presumptive Democratic nominee responded sharply in an interview Saturday night with the Christian Broadcast Network, saying anti-abortion groups were "lying" about his record.

"They have not been telling the truth," Mr. Obama said. "And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying."

He added that it was "ridiculous" to suggest he had ever supported withholding lifesaving treatment for an infant. "It defies common sense and it defies imagination, and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive," he said in the CBN interview.

At issue is the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, a bill in the Illinois state Senate that sought to protect against bungled abortions by requiring that a fetus that survived an abortion be defined as a person. Fearing that the legislation could be interpreted more broadly to protect fetuses that were not yet viable — thus threatening Roe v. Wade, abortion rights advocates pushed for an amendment that explicitly limited the scope of the bill to infants "born alive."

"Nothing in this section," the added sentence reads, "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this section." A federal version with that added clause passed Congress unanimously in 2002, with the support of Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Kennedy, among others. Mr. Obama said in 2004 and again on Saturday that he would have supported the federal version.

During the Democratic primary, Mrs. Clinton's campaign criticized Mr. Obama for voting "present" — instead of "no" — on the "Born Alive" bill in Illinois, which did not contain a provision protecting the Roe v. Wade decision.

The dispute flared again last week when a leading opponent of legalized abortion, the National Right to Life Committee, posted records from the Illinois Legislature showing that Mr. Obama, while chairman of a Senate committee, voted against a "Born Alive" bill that contained nearly identical language to the federal bill that passed unanimously, including the provision limiting its scope.

The group says the documents prove Mr. Obama misrepresented his record.

Indeed, Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday when he said the federal version he supported "was not the bill that was presented at the state level." (Emphasis added.)

Obama's first move was to lie, and to accuse truth-telling critics of lying. He lies a lot. See here, here, and here.

(Hat tips: Jill Stanek & K.J. Lopez.)

Vote accordingly.

LIBERAL PRESS: BRING BACK THE LABOR CAMPS!

You thought you'd seen it all? Sunday's Hartford Courant editorialized in favor of bringing back government work camps:

We wonder if the CCC model shouldn't have another life. In 1933, when it began, there were many unemployed young men in urban areas, and the country needed to work on parks and roads. What a coincidence. Today we have many unemployed young people in urban areas, and many of the country's bridges and roads are in dire need of repair. Would a CCC-style program that puts young people to work fixing them, that teaches the value, discipline and satisfaction of work, be out of the question?

Established by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1933, at its peak, the Civilian Conservation Corps employed 500,000 men in 2500 labor camps. The program was administered by the Army, and specifically excluded any useful job training. The CCC workers received $30 a month, of which $25 was sent to their families. There was a separate work camp program for American Indians.

The Hartford Courant's comments are just plain stupid. Have you ever seen bridges or roadways under repair? There is no way that untrained "young people" would be able to do that work.

What's more:

Although at first intended to help youth escape the cities, city boys were reluctant to join, and most enrollees came from small towns and rural areas.

If you think today's urban unemployed would be eager to live in wooden barracks in remote rural areas, I think you have another think coming.

This is just another example of the left's penchant for the militarization of the entire economy and their wistful nostalgia for the good old days of government run labor camps around the world.

MUSHARRAF RESIGNS

President Pervez Musharraf has announced his resignation.

The jihad is now that much closer to having nuclear weapons.

The exit of Musharraf from the Pakistan political scene adds to the fragile country's turmoil at a time when the United States is asking it to do more against a growing militancy along its border with Afghanistan. Pakistan's importance extends far outside its South Asian borders – it is the world's only known Islamic nation with the nuclear bomb, and some of the world's most wanted terrorists are thought to be hiding along its rugged borders.

Terrorists + Nukes = Problem.

VIDEO AT GATEWAY HERE; ROUND UP HERE.

WoMD: Obama flip flop #35!

WoMD:

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Obama Flip-Flop #35: Soft Money

You can check out the entire list by clicking here.

Posted by Matt Hurley at 11:13 AM

RECOMMENDED READING: CRY WOLF - BY PAUL LAKE

Noted poet and professor Paul Lake has authored a magnificent fable.

An updated "Animal Farm," he portrays what happens when political correctness, moral relativism, multiculturalism and the rest of the Gramscian agenda are put into action.

A dark, disturbing, but very beautifully written story.

Highly recommended.

You can find it on Amazon.

THE FALSE EQUIVALENCE OF MORAL RELATIVISM

In a column decrying the cowardice of Random House for backing out of a deal to publish a novel about the Prophet Mohamed pbuh and his 6-year-old bride, Aisha, the noted lefty English journalist Johann Hari reveals the false equivalence of moral relativism.

He writes:

What would Christianity be like today if George Eliot, Mark Twain and Bertrand Russell had all been pulped? Take the most revolting rural Alabama church, and metastasise it.

Do you think Johann Hari has ever been inside a rural Alabama church?

And is he thinking of a black church or a white church?

Do you think Johann Hari has ever been to Alabama?

I will take an America peopled by Alabama churchgoers -white or black- over an America ruled by the likes of Eliot, Twain, and Russell any day of the week.

MARKET PREDICTION FOR MONDAY 8/18: A BIG SURGE, AKA: "The Saddleback Effect"

PREDICTIONS:

• Oil will drop.
• So will gold.
• The dollar will surge.
• So will US stock markets.

WHY?

The Saddleback Effect.

That stands for the realization that McCain proved, at Saddleback, he can kick Obama's butt.

That means he can win.

And will.

That means more energy exploration... and NO NEW TAXES.

And it means our allies can depend on the USA.

The money will pour in now - relieved that Obama will lose.

I feel that OIL will dip below $109/barrel. GOLD will be proportionally down, too. And the dollar up proportionately. The DJIA will be up 150.

TODAYS' ECON DOINGS HERE AND HERE.

AUSTRALIA - COLDEST WINTER IN OVER A DECADE

The indefatigable Tim Blair links to 8 recent news articles documenting Australia's cold winter:

• The strongest cold outbreak in five years came through NSW and Victoria over the weekend.

• On the Gold Coast in the state’s south-east, the mercury dropped to just one degree Celsius at Coolangatta airport at 4am AEST, in the coldest August morning there in 25 years.

• Landholders and motorists on the Central New South Wales ranges have had to handle the coldest winter outbreak for 15 years.

• Falls Creek has now exceeded its 20 year average snowfall and the forecast is for more snow for the remainder of this week.

• Southern New South Wales is having its coldest weather since 2005, with parts of the highlands blanketed in snow.

• Australia experienced record demand for electricity late yesterday as cold weather swept across the most-populous southeastern states.

• It has been the coldest start to August in 13 years, bringing heavy snowfalls in the ski fields and record low temperatures elsewhere.

The upshot: As Reliapundit says, AGWers should STFU!

WHAT EVIL REALLY LOOKS LIKE

Anyone who doubts that jihadism is evil can read this.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan found that in 2007, at least 33 women were burned in acid attacks, and 45 were set on fire. But the statistics are probably an undercount, since many cases go unreported out of fear.

Senator Barry Soetoro Barack [middle name redacted] Obama said that in opposing evil,

Now, the one thing that I think is very important is for us to have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil. You know a lot of evil has been perpetrated based on the claim that we were trying to confront evil... In the name of good and I think one thing that's very important is having some humility in recognizing that. You know, just because we think our intentions are good doesn't mean that we're going to be doing good.

Obama is an unreconstructed stalwart of the Blame America First crowd. And did you notice how he stammered a bit before coming out with this obnoxious twaddle? He knew that what he was about to say was ugly and wouldn't go down well with the Saddleback crowd, but he hates America so much, he just had to get it out. Even when Pastor Warren tried to break in and stop him.

But when Senator John McCain was asked, "Does evil exist, and if so, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it, or do we defeat it?" he said:

Defeat it.

Vote accordingly.

(Hat tip for the LA Times article: Glenn Reynolds.)

PUTIN: THE REAL UNITER

In the aftermath of Russia's invasion of the Republic of Georgia:

1) Ukraine has announced it will join the US-sponsored missile shield program.

2) Germany has announced it will support Georgia's bid for NATO membership.

3) Russia promises to begin pull out on Monday.

(Hat tip for 1&2: Glenn Reynolds.)

RUSSIA THREATENS TO RE-ARM BALTIC FLEET WITH NUKES

UPDATE: YEAH - WE SCOOPED HOT AIR WITH THIS, BY LIKE 8 HOURS.

STORY HERE. EXCERPT:

Kurt Volker, the US ambassador to NATO, condemned the proposal.

"It is really unfortunate that Russia chooses to react by putting nuclear warheads in different places - if indeed it does that - when the rest of the world is not looking at some kind of old-fashioned superpower conflict," he said, according to the Times.

WE MUST DO SOMETHING MORE FORCEFUL THAN WAIT FOR RUSSIA TO WITHDRAW FROM AND ARM THESE SHIPS.

EXPELLING THEM FROM THE G8 WOULD BE A GOOD START. AND MERELY A START.

NOW!

WHAT LEFTIES ARE GOOD AT

The London Times's Gerard Baker has it exactly right:

To some, China's muscular domination of the Olympic medal table is a powerful allegory of the shifting balance of global power. A far better and more literal testimony to the collapse of the West may be seen in the distinctly weak-kneed response to Russian aggression in Georgia by what is still amusingly called the transatlantic alliance.

Once again, the Europeans, and their friends in the pusillanimous wing of the US Left, have demonstrated that, when it come to those postmodern Olympian sports of synchronized self-loathing, team hand-wringing and lightweight posturing, they know how to sweep gold, silver and bronze.

There's a routine now whenever some unspeakable act of aggression is visited upon us or our allies by murderous fanatics or authoritarian regimes. While the enemy takes a victory lap, we compete in a shameful medley relay of apologetics, defeatism and surrender. (Emphasis added.)

If you want to see more of that, vote for Barry Soetoro.

If you want America to continue to be governed by leaders, vote for John McCain.

And you know you want to read the whole thing.

(Hat tip: the indispensable Gerard Vanderleun.)

8 pictures are worth 8000 words - and none say anything good about Obama

Okay - one is photoshopped.

GOOD AND EVIL

This is all you need to see, to understand the difference between an inexperienced, pettifogging phony whose anti-American prejudices sneak out of every utterance, on the one hand, and on the other hand, an experienced, straight-talking leader:




And note the reaction of the congregation.

(Hat tip: Gateway.)

THE REAL QUESTION FOR BARRY SOETORO

Pastor Rick Warren provided plenty of opportunities for Senator Barack [middle name redacted] Obama, a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, to hem and haw and evade stating his positions on the issues. His attempt to obfuscate his votes in favor of infanticide was particularly striking.

But the real question that nobody in the broadcast media has the courage to ask is this:

What has Barry ever accomplished?

As a community organizer, the only project he could possibly take any credit for is a filthy, decaying slum.

As the politically-elected editor of the Harvard Law Review, he did not write a single article.

As a University of Chicago law professor, he did not author a single scholarly article.

He refuses to make public the details of the legal work for which he billed at the law firm that represented Tony Rezko.

As an Illinois State Senator, all he did was vote "present," and the bills he claims to have passed were given to him by Chicago political fixer Emil Jones.

As a freshman United States Senator, he never even convened a meeting of the Subcommittee he was assigned to Chair.

Obama does not have a single worthwhile accomplishment to put on his resume.

The dutiful son of anti-American leftists, registered as a Muslim by his Indonesian stepfather, the protege of communists and terrorists, the crony of crooks and jihadists, he is unfit for the office of Senator.

He doesn't even rise to the level of being unfit for the Presidency.

The nomination of such an unqualified, undistinguished candidate by the Democrat Party would be an insult to all Americans.

And it is even more insulting that he portrays himself as an "African-American" candidate, since he does not have one gene inherited from a former American slave, and was raised by his white mother and white grandparents outside of an African-American milieu.

THE SIMPLICITY OF OBAMA'S MESSAGE

URL

Even a birdbrain understands Obama's message. LOL.

JON STEWART: PROOF THE LEFT'S "THINKING" ON PUBLIC AFFAIRS IS A JOKE

NYTIMES:

When Americans were asked in a 2007 poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press to name the journalist they most admired,

Mr. Stewart, the fake news anchor, came in at No. 4,

tied with the real news anchors Brian Williams and Tom Brokaw of NBC, Dan Rather of CBS and Anderson Cooper of CNN.

And a study this year from the center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism concluded that “ ‘The Daily Show’ is clearly impacting American dialogue” and “getting people to think critically about the public square.”

• HIS VIEWERS ARE ALL LEFTIES.

• AS ARE THE VIEWERS OF THAT OTHER MORON KEITH OLBERMANN - A FORMER SPORTSCASTER WITH A VERY POPULAR SHOW WITH LEFTIES ON MSNBC.

WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT THE LEFT THAT THEIR NEWS ICONS ARE A COMEDIAN AND A FORMER SPORTSCASTER?

• IT SAYS EVERYTHING. THEY PREFER SNIDE VITRIOL AND FACILE SNARK-ATTACKS TO REAL ANALYSIS.

• IT GOES ALONG WITH THEIR FAVORITE POLITICIAN - OBAMA: HE'S ALSO A JOKE: NO EXPERIENCE, NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS, AND A LIE OR A FLIP-FLOP OR A BROKEN PLEDGE A DAY.

VOTE ACCORDINGLY.

Some Antisemitism is fine in "human rights" Canada

We all know the wringer that Mark Steyn was recently put though in Canada for making a few true statement about Muslims. What do the same human rights honchos think about antisemitism? The answer to that seems to depend on whether it is Left antisemitism or Right antisemitism. In the report of Left antisemitism we read below, we note that none other than the chief commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission deliberately ignores it.

She even claims that its gross antisemitism is "contrary to the spirit, if not the letter, of human rights law". The various antisemitic Canadian Rightist guys who have been hounded by the Canadian human rights machine would be astounded to hear that what they said was "not contrary to the letter of human rights law"! If so, why were they fined and otherwise harassed?

"Since the passage 10 years ago of the Safe Streets Act with its strict controls on panhandling, the Street News has become a popular alternative, selling 4,000 copies every two weeks across Toronto. Homeless people pay a nominal fee at various collection points, then sell it for $2 an issue.

But under this guise of charity, it has become the city's most prominent vehicle for hate propaganda, outrageous conspiracy theories, blatant plagiarism and libellous personal attacks, though virtually nothing about the homeless, all published at the whim of a man who lives a two-hour drive away in Ontario's farm belt.

In the past year, the paper has claimed Liberal MP Bob Rae's name was changed from Levine to hide his Jewishness and that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's secret true birthday is the same as Adolf Hitler's, which "looks good on a resume" for "New World Order types."

It has claimed a police officer covered up racist attacks on a shopkeeper, and even the editor admits one article was an illegal incitement to genocide against Jews. Ads are rare to non-existent, and often unpaid. "It's a little left wing," the General said. "Real out there."

Barbara Hall, chief commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, calls it an "unpleasant rant," full of anti-Semitism and senseless paranoia that is contrary to the spirit, if not the letter, of human rights law. "I don't like it. It's offensive," she said. "I suspect that a large number of people who open it would very quickly do what I did, which is say, 'This is scurrilous stuff ' and throw it away

Source

Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH

Profanity greater on liberal blogs

Are liberals more profane than conservatives? Online, the answer seems to be yes. Profanity, those taboo words banned from the broadcast airwaves, is a feature of many people's daily lives. It's much less so in the establishment media world. TV and radio broadcasts are legally prohibited from using it, most newspapers (including this one) have traditionally refrained from its usage.

That's not the case with the Web, where bloggers and readers face no such restrictions. That likely comes as no surprise; what may be surprising, however, is to what degree profanity seems to be a feature more common on one side of the political blogosphere than the other. Which side is that? For answers, I turned to the search engine Google to see how common swearing is in the right and left blog universes by looking up the late stand-up comic George Carlin's "seven dirty words" in the most popular blog communities.

The results showed that online liberals tend to use profanity a lot more than online conservatives. (Before I get further into the results, let me say that I am deliberately making a distinction between blogs that do not usually allow readers to make comments and those that do. This means that some sites, such as the popular Instapundit or Newsmax, were not included.)

Searching for Mr. Carlin's seven words and some popular variants at the top 10 conservative Web communities yields about 70,000 results. That is dwarfed in comparison to the 1.9 million instances of profanity on liberal sites. Things aren't quite that clear-cut, however, since some Web sites have more pages than others. According to Google, the top 10 conservative sites have about 6 million pages, while the top 10 liberal sites have about 13 million.

Dividing the number of instances of profanity by the number of pages of the sites on which they appear, then multiplying the result by 100 yields what might be called a "profanity quotient." The top 10 liberal sites (Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Democratic Underground, Talking Points Memo, Crooks and Liars, Think Progress, Atrios, Greenwald, MyDD and Firedoglake) have a profanity quotient of 14.6. The top 10 conservative sites (Free Republic, Hot Air, Little Green Footballs, Townhall, NewsBusters, Lucianne.com, Wizbang, Ace of Spades, Red State and Volokh Conspiracy) have a quotient of 1.17. That's quite a disparity. Liberals are more than 12 times likely to use profanity than conservatives on the Web.

More here

None of this is surprising in view of the basic psychology of Left and Right. The Left are full of hate and anger -- and profanity is a normal byproduct of hate and anger. Conservatives are calm enough to think. Leftists just emote. It's another part of the Leftist tendency to substitute abuse for reasoned argument

Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH