Budget Architect: “Waste of Money” to Research Climate Change











Director Mick Mulvaney of the Office of Management and Budget is reportedly one of the chief architects behind the newly-released White House budget proposal, and he isn’t shy about defending the deep cuts recommended in the plan. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Mulvaney was asked about President Trump’s proposal to slash the EPA’s funding and how it would affect governmental research on climate change.

“Part of your answer is focusing on efficiencies and focusing on doing what we do better. As to climate change, I think the President was fairly straightforward saying we’re not spending money on that anymore,” Mulvaney said. “We consider that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that. So that is a specific tie to his campaign.”

Trump has suggested deep spending cuts to several government agencies, including the EPA, in his proposal for discretionary spending for Fiscal Year 2017. He has also announced his plans to eliminate at least 3,000 jobs at the EPA, a move that would by itself curtail much of the department’s regulatory enforcement power. He is also talking seriously about yanking U.S. participation in the Paris Climate Agreement, which could save taxpayers in excess of half a billion dollars.

In his remarks on Thursday, Mulvaney said that Trump’s budget was in line with the theme of his candidacy.

“The President is absolutely going to keep his promises made on the campaign trail,” Mulvaney said. “He did not ask lobbyists for input on this. He did not ask special interests for input on this and he certainly didn’t focus on how these programs might impact a specific congressional district but we know that going into it. The message we’re sending to the Hill is, we want more money for the things the President talked about, defense being the top one, national security and we don’t want to add to the budget deficit.”

Specific to the EPA, Trump has spoken numerous times about his skepticism of the official line on climate change, putting him back on the firm footing that many moderate Republicans have abandoned. But really, this comes down less to what you believe or don’t believe about climate change and more to what you believe the federal government should or shouldn’t be doing with our tax dollars. Even climate change zealots have said the Obama administration’s efforts will do little to curb carbon emissions. Why should we spend billions on programs that do nothing to curb a problem that we don’t have?

Republicans aren’t going to pass this budget as it is, but if they even keep a fraction of Trump’s framework, it’ll be one of the biggest strikes for small government conservatism we’ve seen in a long time. And it will come from a president who mainstream conservative thinkers barely consider to be part of their ideological ranks. How interesting…


  • GODBlessRealAmerica!
  • gotabgood

    EDUCATION IS AN INVESTMENT

    Public Education is being cut by 13%!

    Ironic Public College use to be free right here in the
    USofA.

    Now they are getting rich on the backs of your kids!

    Any time you bring the dollar into ANY program/plan the
    program will dwindle, while incentive to make more money grows, which creates
    the opportunity for lying, cheating or flat out embezzling. Much like Charter Schools.

    For those of you that are a little skeptical of what Trump
    is doing or trying to do, with his billionaire cabinet and Russian associations.

    Just as money in politics is bad, money in education is worse. It is a training to our kids that
    the bottom line is more important than the product….. OUR KIDS!! And OUR GOVERNMENT!!!

    https://weaponsofmassdeception.org/3-charter-school-kid-prisons/3-3-why-charter-schools-are-fraud-factories

    >

    Florida’s Charter
    Schools

    Unsupervised

    http://interactive.sun-sentinel.com/charter-schools-unsupervised/investigation.html

    >

    How will charter schools deal with their corruption
    scandals?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/08/08/how-will-charter-schools-deal-with-their-corruption-scandals/

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6e80f15a8a09ca7bcdab16e48162b8038c006e4bf5cb9eae7e7645bc1ed3a93c.png

  • gotabgood

    EPA CUT BY 31% !!

    It is hard for me to understand why people would stand for
    this. Even the people that suggested this cut is NOT immune to the effects that cutting this program WILL have on ALL of us! Even those that live far away from any coast, we wil have our own refugees, from all the coastal cities.. they will be seeking shelter in states like Oklahoma, Kansas, Tennessee, you ready for them??

    Some of its functions;

    Environmental licensing

    Enforcement of environmental law

    Environmental planning, education and
    guidance

    Monitoring, analyzing and reporting on the
    environment

    Regulating Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions

    Environmental research development

    Strategic environmental assessment

    Waste management

    Radiological protection

    Under each of those headings could be a further break-down.

    True story. I was born and raised in a small town which had a lake right at the edge
    of the town. We swam in it, fished in it. They built a new sewage plant across
    the lake, (this was before EPA) and they dumped it into the lake. Soon they closed the lake to swimming and later to fishing. A few years later, the sewage plant was closed, the
    lake cleaned up, but most of the older folks, still will not go into the water…
    they remember.

    If you have 100 employees and your budget was cut by 10%,
    you would lay off 10 workers just to stay even, maybe 11 or 12 if you wanted to
    make a profit… but you would expect the same amount of work to be done as when
    you had a full crew. So you would
    require longer hours (non-union) and maybe more days. And maybe cut some
    corners, because product is not as important as bottom line. Now think about cutting your budget 31% ON TOP
    of the previous cuts you have endured.. you are down to skeleton crew of maybe
    50%

    That is the results of Flint, Michigan, that is the results
    Charleston, West Virginia.

    The many explosions that have taken place in Texas. The fertilizer plant near Waco, Texas. A Chemical plant exploded in Conroe, Texas.

    And here comes your laughing point (for those of you that
    are ignorant/stupid). Global warming is
    real.

    I will give even Republicans credit for
    not constructing roadways, parks, parking lots, walkways and buildings where
    they know that at high tide that place would be flooded.

    But yet that is exactly what happened! Buildings, roads, parking lots are all being
    flooded.

    You do know what a record means right? When Mike Phelps broke swim records that
    means never before in history has someone swam that fast. Not 25 years ago someone was faster, not 50
    years, not 100 years..NEVER.

    Heat records are being broken every year, not just in USA,
    but all over the world and especially our snow caps.

    And now we have Scott Pruitt, his once firm (unshakeable)
    home state of Oklahoma, now thanks to fracking gone wild has more earthquakes
    than California.

    Now some videos;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIMrq_-JiZI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SogJ5NHbOI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7abSExQ-10

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Il8Ehx_Zm8

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkByMwwYWKw

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vswWc3IE0oA

    THINK!!

    • GODBlessRealAmerica!
    • GODBlessRealAmerica!
    • GODBlessRealAmerica!
    • GODBlessRealAmerica!
      • Germansmith

        you know the song….
        he is your boogie man, that what he is
        you dream of him wherever you are

        Do you honestly believe this crap?….never mind the question…you do
        End of discussion, you are a paranoid idiot

    • Mike with the Silver Star

      Evidently you have no idea what freedom is snowflake; Ther EPA has crossed and violated the constitution numerous times. You are worried about Americans, you should be thankful President Trump has put 80,000 coal miners back to work so they can feed their families, or maybe you don’t know enough to give 2 shits.

      • Harold

        Ah the classic ‘snowflake’ defense… As the article saysTrump has put us back on the
        ‘firm footing that many moderate Republicans have abandoned’: s snowflake. So we will lay off scientists and make decisions about how we protect the environment based
        opinions and money. We’re in trouble.

        • Arizona Don

          We were in trouble under obama for eight grueling years. We finally have a person in that office who looks at things realistically.

          barack obama failed at everything because he did not know what he was doing. Consequently, the only things he had a chance of succeeding on were and had to be made up non-existent problems. Global Warming was the main one. Once it is possible to get idiots to believe it it makes stupid people look bright.

          • Whaledriver

            Obama knew exactly what he was doing. He has attempted to divide and kill this nation through the death of a thousand knife wounds: bad laws, the emergence of the police state America; the murder of our soldiers; racial division; and the destruction of people’s ability to think and reason for themselves.

          • Arizona Don

            You are extremely correct! Thanks for the input.

      • Germansmith

        You should go and have that head injury examined

        There are NOT going to be 80,000 miners going to work digging coal, that is another TRUMP BS……whatever coal is extracted, will be done by large strippers destroying a mountain.
        Coal is the dirtiest fuel there is and even if the US decides to bury their head and walk away from the Paris Agreement, most other countries (who have governments that believe in Science) are walking away from coal and using natural gas instead while investing in other technologies and creating new industries ….while Trump build his wall and buy more nuclear weapons.

        Maybe you do not give 2 shits in contaminating the planet as long as 80,000 get the privilege of dying of black lung disease

        • Compte de Grasse

          Once again You are WRONG. Coal mines have already restarted in West Virginia. I’ll take pictures next time I travel through that state and post them here just for your benefit. Your repetition of Al Gore talking points while chanting the mantras of “consensus” and “science” don’t give them any more credibility.

      • gotabgood

        Yes dipshit I do know what freedom is…. the right to breathe clean air… to drink clean water and eat some good food not grown with chemicals.
        Take a look at the larger cities and that is what you want to breathe??

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d25133ba395f32d21860d7b23c2109ded4aab56984658b316e1a9cc7c1b9178b.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4a6ba1c22949892a4cdcb3f45788e92cc3e2738b3ada7283841eb083f8818f64.jpg

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/550a7001b9e7b66923f17accba926c87b7d2ebe844d125a22d0fd95a9505e677.jpg

        • rev_dave

          Help me understand this please. Your view of ‘freedom’ is clean air and food. So if you had that, but your government tracked every movement you make and every communication, is that still free? When they then require over 1/3 of your paycheck to pay for a privileged class that doesn’t work and to support all the monitoring is that still free? What about when your clean air comes at the cost of a warm apartment in winter? Or a 1 chicken per month per family limit, because farmers can only raise that many ‘naturally’, and egg production nearly stops in winter – because that’s what chickens do?

          Everything has a cost and some things only happen at the cost of others not being available. The marketplace itself will give us clean air and food, when there is a demand. 20 years ago you’d have been lucky to find any organic food at your grocery – today EVERY grocery I go into has at least some and larger chains have entire departments that are all organic. It’s happening without any government mandate. Of course, it’s still more expensive than ‘factory farm’ food, but you have the ‘clean food’ choice.
          On the other hand, no government can mandate any kind of utopia – it simply takes too much wealth to pay the bureaucrats and enforcers, both of which are non-productive positions in any economy. It’s all about choices.

          • gotabgood

            Let’s use your scenario.The government did not track your every movement and did not listen to your conversations…. without food, water and air…. would you even care?

            I think we should demand a 1/3 of the millionaires pay check and close ALL off shore banks.

            Your priorities are assbackwards…. you can live under surveillance… you can live under even a 50% tax rate… without air… you die.. a minute.. 2 minutes. So look first to the things that are a necessities and work down.

            You think putting the coal miners back to work, which won’t happen, is the answer to all our problems world wide.. actually them going back to work is harmful to our environment world wide.

            Even the rich have to breathe… with all the resources they have at their finger tips.. they still prefer money over clean air… their thoughts are, it won’t happen in my life time, so I am going to live it up… my grand kids will have to fend for themselves.

            Choices.. rev_dave??
            My choice is to have it the way God planned it. Leave the fossil fuel in the ground where He buried it!
            Digging/fracking is taking a toll on all areas involved. Tap water catching on fire! Earthquakes in Oklahoma happening more often than in California.
            The BP disaster and many more over the years.
            Freedom first is air, then water, then food, then shelter, then health… lose any of those and your weeks, days, hours and minutes are numbered.

          • rev_dave

            Well, I wrote a long and detailed reply, and Disqus just messed itself, so that’s apparently gone. Here’s the short version:

            You’ve confused me with someone else, and started calling me names. I never mentioned coal miners. Please try to keep your comment wars straight as to whom you’re going after.

            I agree that we’d all be better off if the world were as God made it. But it isn’t.

          • gotabgood

            You jumped into a conversation I was having with Mike and silver star and he was talking about coal miners, you came along and not agreeing me, but taking sides with the coal miner is how that came about.
            And what name did I call you?

          • GODBlessRealAmerica!
      • Whaledriver

        Great moments at the EPA.

        The EPA pushes for tungsten-filament incandescent light bulbs to be outlawed. The EPA requires people to replace them with Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs), which contain mercury. Instead of using more energy with regular light bulbs, CFL bulbs put tons of mercury annually into our landfills and thus into our water table, permanently poisoning the earth.

    • disqus_C6fGXmCFNc

      uh oh there is the Mo ron again.

    • roger dodger

      Liberal dem bloodsucker, you ersatz life forms should be run out of the USA at pitchfork point.
      Forget about it leech.

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      And yet Venice, Italy has the same sea level it has existed with for centuries.

      Perhaps that will change when all the snowflakes in America melt and their brains thaw out.

    • 83ragtop50

      You forgot to mention feeding grandma and little orphans.

    • Germansmith

      Do not bother with facts and videos….these people are idiots
      I live in Miami and I know first hand what you are talking about

      They had a pile of evidences that Trump and his crew just want to benefit their sponsors by cutting government to the bone and letting the corporations abuses the resources that belong to all of us without paying for them……and still voted for him
      Unless you are a white supremacist OR a corporate big shot in the 1% , there was no REASON to vote for Trump, but lots still did…..maybe prodded by envy, or hate created by propaganda, erroneous belief that Trump was going to help them get a factory job….
      Well, unless you live near a defense plant….good luck with that

      In the main time AHCA will make you go without health insurance as it will become more expensive for those over 50, also deplete the Medicare fund, if you live outside the big cities, his budget will cut down subsidies for communications and transportation companies for providing benefits to rural communities….

      It still baffles me how people vote AGAINST their own benefit by buying BS….I guess that is why there are so many con people still duping old folks

      • GODBlessRealAmerica!

        The idiots are you and the liberal racist party you Liberal moron,,,now get educated you low life hating Liberal pos!!!!!!!!! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5fc72321d1bac29a726763663d66fb0ae8d03483972268dd8689343dd55da9f1.jpg

      • gotabgood

        I also cannot understand why they vote against themselves… you want a raise, benefits, paid vacation, retirement, join a union…. oh no, not me I heard unions are corrupt, I will stick with RTW (for less) Of course the CEO’s and politicians are not corrupt. (satire)
        I have even ask them to show me one thing the rightwing has done good for the American worker in the past 50 years. Not one has ever replied. You could go back a 100 years if you don’t count Eisenhower.

    • Karen

      Your pictures say a thousand words!! We DUMP all this money into the EPA and we STILL get the results you show in your pictures!! Looks like it didn’t help much to stop the above floods, however, it probably CAUSED the above floods!! It seems, if you are over spending money to FIX a problem, and the problem still exits, money is NOT what is going to FIX the problem!! You want to spend(waste) money on something we cannot control!! The WEATHER!! We can’t even correctly PREDICT it, yet YOU want to continue throwing money away on it! You know, Trump didn’t say he was going to totally CUT the EPA, he just wants to TRIM the EPA! Maybe those that remain will work harder, so that they can keep their job, thus increasing their job performance, thus a more productive EPA!! Bet you didn’t think about that outcome did you?? WAKE UP AMERICA!!

      • gotabgood

        Just like in Benghazi… You cut the budget and you expected the same results…. well surprise, surprise… it don’t work that way..
        You do know that congress controls the spending right??? Well since 2010 when you came into power you have cut and cut and cut and cut… EPA and other programs have suffered with man power loss, equipment upgrades… like if they had the man power in West Virginia, their water may never had been polluted. the same with Flint.. but then you have a dictator in Michigan.
        Finally a statement of truth from you… TRUE.. we cannot control the WEATHER… but we damn sure can do something about the CLIMATE!!! That is probably the biggest problem with the rightwing, (red states), they do not know there truly is a difference between weather and climate.
        Is smog man made?
        That is the air they breathe!! We did that..and we can also fix that!!!!!!! Just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist… like an atom or the 1000 of germs we breathe in and out daily. Through special equipment they atoms and germs… just like they can measure CO2 in our air and what effect it has on our system.
        drop the alternative facts….. you are messing with our home.. it is NOT YOURS to play with.. it belongs to ALL OF US….
        and here is a little thought provoking cartoon… think!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/550a7001b9e7b66923f17accba926c87b7d2ebe844d125a22d0fd95a9505e677.jpg

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/485c47027e020d1b565e55537a497eb79303dc29c83a1871443e75961a415f44.jpg

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bd4dd7bba8fd34c86bd2a04724375d10da1ea614483e0ccd129dab4618a4409b.jpg

        • Compte de Grasse

          You are hinting that You can control the CLIMATE……AMAZING…. are You GOD ???

          • mac12sam12

            He isn’t God, he just has ESPN.

          • gotabgood

            NO! I am not hinting at all…. I am saying we can and we are right now in a negative way!!
            if you just stop a minute and think…. I am sure you will admit that smog is man made, right? We did that and through the EPA, we have cleaned up a lot of cities.
            You can see smog, feel, and smell the results of it. CO2 maybe a little different, but just because you can’t see the germ that is killing you doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. You can see the results of what the germ is doing to your body, just like you can see the results of CO2. Glaciers melting, sea raising, heat records being set each year. Corral reefs dying in the ocean. Our seasons are changing..
            Pay attention… you will see it for yourself..

          • Compte de Grasse

            CO2 is a life essential gas, without which, the planet and You would be dead. If You won’t accept the basic sciences on this matter, there is no helping You. As far as the ice caps and glaciers; NOAA, USGS, and U.S. Navy among other agencies, present evidence that contradict your opinions. The only thing that will kill You in this discussion is your paranoia. Meanwhile, Nature will continue to do its usual job of maintaining itself. EPA is a bureaucratic parasite that We need to abolish.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGqcweY1a3I

          • gotabgood

            One of the main sources of CO2 eating life forms is the tree and of course other plant and microorganism.. But trees are the big ones that actually store CO2, they transform that into Oxygen… but see man has appeared on the scene and we helped mother nature out by building coal burning power plants that pump CO2 into the atmosphere 24/7/365, where as volcanoes will stop in a few days, but both add CO2. now add a billion cars world wide, and manufactures. Forest fires not only destroy plant life and trees but it releases the stored CO2 also.. double duty.

            But here is the biggie…

            Q:
            How many trees are cut down each day?
            A:
            Quick Answer
            Throughout the world, about 900 million trees are cut down annually, as of 2014.
            That equates to about 2.47 million trees cut down every day. These
            trees are used to make everything from lumber and paper to deodorant and
            food additives.

            https://www.reference.com/science/many-trees-cut-down-day-42bf5e6262028f2d ( this is called a reference, you should start using them)

            When trying to prove a point gather all the facts.

            We are talking of global warming.. CO2 is the main factor in all this, but we have MANY factors to add to the problem.

            You do know that cities are hotter than the country side, why? Cement and black top hold the heat longer than grass and dirt. Since man, we have built cities which were never there before, so that has added heat to our system. Roadways, parking lots scattered across the globe also add to the heat.

            You know on a cloudy night, it remains warmer than on a clear night, because the clouds hold the heat in. Smog is a man made cloud which act the same as a cloud, it holds the heat in.
            Air conditioners in summer and furnaces in winter also add to the heat.

          • GODBlessRealAmerica!
          • Compte de Grasse

            “Reference.com” isn’t a reference. It is a blog collection of invented numbers……where did those numbers come from…..Dept of Forestry?….Boise-Cascade?……they were made up by some Green Peace cadet at summer camp.

            Any marginal influence that human activity may have on the weather is greatly overshadowed by nature itself: 500 recently erupted active volcanoes on the planet…..

            https://www2.usgs.gov/faq/categories/9819/2689

          • gotabgood

            I would like to see your proof of NASA or NOAA saying anything opposite of what I said. See this is where references come in handy.
            Out of 100% climate scientist there are 3% that have a different view. and you can break down that 3% even further, by saying they agree the globe is warming, but skeptical on man being responsible.. but that still leaves 97% in agreement.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f6bc26fe748b25ecee990b4a64388f1106d5c16c34381a6c584f3daf02cb986a.jpg

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e3cd786f33147685c1e579b4adc51b5e1877f9b6b9eebd543c01f3e65a1ec220.jpg

          • GODBlessRealAmerica!
          • Compte de Grasse

            Your “97% of scientists” have not reached their conclusions based on any objective science but are chasing government grants that are paying them to support eco-nazi agendas….

            http://conservativetribune.com/noaa-new-data-50-years-lies/

          • Compte de Grasse
          • gotabgood

            He is a fraud… he holds no science degrees, he is a politician a rightwing politician at that! “Monckton is also Scotland Leader of the right-wing nationalist party United Kingdom Independence Party”.
            This is why references are needed..

            Christopher Monckton
            Christopher Monckton, AGW denier

            Learn more from the Center for Media and Democracy’s research on climate change.
            Christopher Monckton is a non-scientist AGW denier, who has had articles published in The Guardian and in a non-peer-reviewed newsletter[1] of the American Physical Society (whose Council subsequently disagreed with Monckton’s conclusions)[1]
            claiming that global warming is neither man-made nor likely to be
            catastrophic. Monckton has made various false claims in the past such as
            that he is a member of the British House of Lords.[2],
            a Nobel Prize winner, inventor of a cure for HIV, winner of a
            defamation case against George Monbiot and writer of a peer-reviewed
            article. He was deputy leader of the far right United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) before being sacked from the party in 2013.

          • GODBlessRealAmerica!
          • Compte de Grasse

            If You had taken the time to actually watch Lord Monckton’s presentation, you would have noted the weather records that He uses for reference. If You have a real interest in this issue, You should go back and watch it, as well as this:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHFfOOF-6Fs

    • GODBlessRealAmerica!
    • Compte de Grasse

      How convenient that each of the above were recorded during nearby Hurricane, Typhoon, or Tsunami events. Normal sea levels remain unchanged.

      • gotabgood

        Do you read?? Do you understand what you read?
        Do you know the definition of “high tide”?
        When was the last time a hurricane hit NYC?
        When was the last time a Tsunami hit NYC?
        The date is on the video is says NYC HIGH TIDE 2016.. think that was left over from Sandy?

        • Compte de Grasse

          You only insult yourself with your blathering hysteria. Do your own research of the most recent storms, which have occurred at ALL of those locations. Consult somewhere other than “the View” or Al Gore’s blogs…..Looking at New York City’s live web cams now reveals a SHOCKING truth…..the sea level right now is at it’s normal tidal range as it usually is when not influenced by a weather event. GET BACK ON YOUR MEDICATIONS BEFORE YOU HURT YOURSELF.

        • GODBlessRealAmerica!
    • mac12sam12

      Do you know how many glaziers were on Earth when Al Gore was born? 31,000 and now we’re down to 31,000.

      • gotabgood

        In Glacier National Park (GNP), MT some effects of
        global climate change are strikingly clear. Glacier recession is underway, and
        many glaciers have already disappeared. The retreat of these small alpine
        glaciers reflects changes in recent climate as glaciers respond to altered
        temperature and precipitation. It has been estimated that there were
        approximately 150 glaciers present in 1850, and most glaciers were
        still present in 1910 when the park was established
        . In 2010, we
        consider there to be only 25 glaciers larger than 25 acres remaining in GNP. A
        computer-based climate model predicts that some of the park’s largest glaciers
        will vanish by 2030 (Hall and Fagre, 2003). This is only one model prediction
        but, if true, then the park’s glaciers could disappear in the next several
        decades. However, glacier disappearance may occur even earlier, as many of the
        glaciers are retreating faster than their predicted rates.

        http://nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/glacier_retreat.htm

        From your ‘ice age’ until 1850, we had
        150 glaciers and were still around for another 60 years in 1910 when the park
        was established. THEN from 1910 to 2010
        we lost 125 glaciers!?!

  • Tiger

    It is hooey and 1000 scientists went to the UN and told them so also said nothing but a scheme to redistribute the wealth, that was said clearly by some of the UN’s own people at one of their conventions on Climate Change in Cancun, Mexico. There was a stash of thousands of emails, among scientists, including the world’s so-called best and those emails told the story. Lies, deceit and messing with data to back the UN’s agenda.

    For ages the UN has tried to such money out of America, more so than any other country and until the insipid Muslim O none of our presidents played the game. Thank you Trump for putting honest men in positions to shut off the water faucet pouring out tax payers dollars.

  • GODBlessRealAmerica!
  • gotabgood

    WARNINGS FROM OUR PAST!

    “I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than
    standing armies.” —Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the
    United States (1801–1809) and principal author of the United States Declaration
    of Independence (1776), in a letter
    written to John Taylor on May 28, 1816

    “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and
    acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government,
    to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the
    day.”— Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States,
    Theodore Roosevelt, An Autobiography,
    1913 (Appendix B)

    “A great
    industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our
    system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the
    hands of a few men… [W]e
    have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled
    and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no
    longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress
    of small groups of dominant men.” – Woodrow Wilson, 28th
    President of the United States, The New Freedom, 1913

    “The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers
    has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
    — Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 32nd President of the United States (1933–1945), in a
    letter to Colonel Edward M House dated November 21, 1933, as quoted in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945.

    “Today the path to total dictatorship in the U.S. can be
    laid by strictly legal means… We have
    a well-organized political-action group in this country, determined to destroy our Constitution
    and establish a one-party state… It
    operates secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government…
    This ruthless power-seeking elite is a disease
    of our century… This group…is answerable neither to the President, the
    Congress, nor the courts. It is practically irremovable.” –
    Senator William Jenner, 1954 speech

    “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of
    unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial
    complex. The
    potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or
    democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only
    an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge
    industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and
    goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.” – Dwight D.
    Eisenhower, 34th President of the United States,, January 1961 Speech

    “The very
    word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we
    are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret
    oaths and to secret proceedings… Our way
    of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing
    around the globe… no war
    ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are
    awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and
    its presence has never been more imminent… For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic
    and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its
    sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead
    of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night
    instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material
    resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that
    combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political
    operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its
    mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its
    dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is
    questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.” — John F Kennedy, 35th
    President of the United States, from a speech delivered to the American
    Newspaper Publishers Association on April 27, 1961 and known as the “Secret Society” speech (click here for full
    transcript and audio).

    “The Rockefellers
    and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully
    following a plan to use
    their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the
    rest of the world. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot,
    international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in
    intent.” Congressman Larry P. McDonald, November 1975, from the
    introduction to a book titled The
    Rockefeller File.

  • GODBlessRealAmerica!
  • gotabgood

    You ought to love this… it is from one of your very own conspiracy theorist ALEX JONES!

    45 Signs That America Will Soon Be A Nation With A Very Tiny Elite And The Rest Of Us Will Be Poor..

    https://www.infowars.com/45-signs-that-america-will-soon-be-a-nation-with-a-very-tiny-elite-and-the-rest-of-us-will-be-poor/

  • gotabgood

    The child crawled through imperial muck and toddled through communism/capitalism; but now finally it is ready to walk.

  • gotabgood
  • GODBlessRealAmerica!
    • Marjoriershin

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours & have longer with friends and family! !da221c:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !da221c:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialCashJobs511ShopExpoGetPaid$97/Hour ★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫::::::!da221c:….,….

      • Justin Seine

        Oh No, Marjorie. You’ve got that wrong! It is only 97 cents per hour and it as billed as “A Jobs Program For the Chronically Incapable”

      • ⭐️ Orphan

        ( ° ͜ʖ͡°)╭∩╮!

      • If you are getting so dam rich with Google, why don’t you get your own website and STOP putting this crap on important sites?

        • Joseph C Moore USN Ret

          Yes!

    • Germansmith

      Should have asked God for a brain instead

      One thing I agree on is that the issue is SETTLED. The earth is getting warmer and we are the main cause of this by cutting down forests, increasing the release of CO2 and other gases and excessive animal husbandry.

      The Idiot in Chief just want spend money in more weapons and a build a useless wall

      Who knows, maybe Trump is God “Mysterious Way” to end up the world

      • CrustyOldGeezer

        One thing I agree on is that the issue is SETTLED.

        OK, PROVE it with SCIENCE and leave the hyperbole and ‘consensus’ in the garbage can where it belongs.

        In case you missed the notice, “Consensus” IS NOT “Science” but merely the echos from the talking points barrel.

        • 83ragtop50

          And without the fudged temperatures data used to draw invalid conclusions. Even NOA has had to admit the numbers used in 2015 were bad. Skewed to be too high to support Obama’s witch hunt.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Oddly enough, most of the FAA weather stations, instead of being remote from human interference, were located next to massive PAVED airport Aprons, runways and other places. More than a few were photographed in areas where jet engine exhaust were in a direct line with the stations.

            Also, they have failed to produce, and verify the accuracy of the ‘historical average temperatures over the last thousand years’…..

            Odd that they also included ‘satellite data’ in with the previous ‘historical average…’ comment.

          • Whaledriver

            In 1928, many of the world’s scientists met together to define the parameters of a so-called “standard atmosphere” — to include the major layers of the atmosphere. This data was compiled and published, to include what defines the scientific “identity” of gases: temperature; pressure; and density. At that time, earth’s ambient temperature at sea level was calculated as 15° C (59° F); the atmospheric pressure, 101.3 kPa; and density, 1.225 Kg/m3. Any permanent change in one of these constants would affect the others.resulusazz

            With all the global warming catastrophes cited, climate change hysteria, the standard atmospheric temperature at sea level, 89 years later, is still 59° F.

          • Bob Wexler

            “There still is not a single bit of evidence that suggests that earth has always had ice-covered poles.”

            Of course there is. Just Look at the satellite photos from a million years ago.

          • Whaledriver

            You funny!

          • Mathew Molk

            Remember when some research cupcakes were at the north pole gathering global warming data and they had to be medivaced out because the temperatures were much lower then they outfitted for? –

            Headline —
            Researchers freeze to death trying to prove global warming.

          • Kevin

            Is that the one where their research vessel got trapped in the ice that wasn’t supposed to be there because of Global Warming? 🙂

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            No, that was off Antarctica

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Or the ‘live reporter and crew’ that was in a canoe showing the devastation of some storm ravaged city that will take decade to repair all the damage when somebody walked behind the canoe in ankle deep water.

          • Whaledriver

            I missed it. However, nature didn’t.

          • sweetolbob

            YEAH ! HEH !

          • Kevin

            Yup, and I’ll bet all those T-Rex’s excessive use of SUVs also contributed to the higher CO2 content of the Earth’s atmosphere 200-300 million years ago (over twice the levels seen today) – BAD DINO, BAD DINO!

          • pineapple

            Not to mention all those DINO farts!

          • Grassroots

            Actually, livestock farts are a significant contributor to ozone loss.

          • Mustafa Curtess

            As if “ozone loss” is any more than a scary theory.

          • Grassroots

            It would be reassuring to believe it’s only a scary theory. Science tells us otherwise.

          • pineapple

            Top scientists start to examine fiddled global
            warming figures

            The Global
            Warming Policy Foundation has enlisted an international team of five
            distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry

            By
            Christopher Booker

            Last
            month, we are told, the world enjoyed “its hottest March since records
            began in 1880”. This year, according to “US government scientists”,
            already bids to outrank 2014 as “the hottest ever”. The figures from the US
            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were based, like all the
            other three official surface temperature records on which the world’s
            scientists and politicians rely, on data compiled from a network of weather
            stations by NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN).

            But
            here there is a puzzle. These temperature records are not the only ones with
            official status. The other two, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University
            of Alabama (UAH), are based on a quite different method of measuring
            temperature data, by satellites. And these, as they have increasingly done in
            recent years, give a strikingly different picture. Neither shows last month as
            anything like the hottest March on record, any more than they showed 2014 as
            “the hottest year ever”.

            Back
            in January and February, two items in this column attracted more than 42,000
            comments to the Telegraph website from all over the world. The provocative
            headings given to them were “Climategate the sequel: how we are still
            being tricked by flawed data on global warming” and “The fiddling
            with temperature data is the biggest scientific scandal”.

            My
            cue for those pieces was the evidence multiplying from across the world that
            something very odd has been going on with those official surface temperature
            records, all of which ultimately rely on data compiled by NOAA’s GHCN. Careful
            analysts have come up with hundreds of examples of how the original data
            recorded by 3,000-odd weather stations has been “adjusted”, to exaggerate the
            degree to which the Earth has actually been warming. Figures from earlier
            decades have repeatedly been adjusted downwards and more recent data adjusted
            upwards, to show the Earth having warmed much more dramatically than the
            original data justified.

            So
            strong is the evidence that all this calls for proper investigation that my
            articles have now brought a heavyweight response. The Global Warming
            Policy Foundation (GWPF) has enlisted an international team of five
            distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry into just how far
            these manipulations of the data may have distorted our picture of what is
            really happening to global temperatures.

            The
            panel is chaired by Terence Kealey, until recently vice-chancellor of the
            University of Buckingham. His team, all respected experts in their field with
            many peer-reviewed papers to their name, includes Dr Peter Chylek, a physicist
            from the National Los Alamos Laboratory; Richard McNider, an emeritus professor
            who founded the Atmospheric Sciences Programme at the University of Alabama;
            Professor Roman Mureika from Canada, an expert in identifying errors in
            statistical methodology; Professor Roger Pielke Sr, a noted climatologist from
            the University of Colorado, and Professor William van Wijngaarden, a physicist
            whose many papers on climatology have included studies in the use of
            “homogenisation” in data records.

            Their
            inquiry’s central aim will be to establish a comprehensive view of just how far
            the original data has been “adjusted” by the three main surface records: those
            published by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss), the US National
            Climate Data Center and Hadcrut, that compiled by the East Anglia Climatic
            Research Unit (Cru), in conjunction with the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre for
            Climate Prediction. All of them are run by committed believers in man-made
            global warming.

            For
            this the GWPF panel is initially inviting input from all those analysts across
            the world who have already shown their expertise in comparing the originally
            recorded data with that finally published. In particular, they will be wanting
            to establish a full and accurate picture of just how much of the published
            record has been adjusted in a way which gives the impression that temperatures
            have been rising faster and further than was indicated by the raw measured
            data.

            Already
            studies based on the US, Australia, New Zealand, the Arctic and South America
            have suggested that this is far too often the case.

            But
            only when the full picture is in will it be possible to see just how far the
            scare over global warming has been driven by manipulation of figures accepted
            as reliable by the politicians who shape our energy policy, and much else
            besides. If the panel’s findings eventually confirm what we have seen so far,
            this really will be the “smoking gun”, in a scandal the scale and significance
            of which for all of us can scarcely be exaggerated.

            More
            details of the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s International Temperature
            Data Review Project are available on the inquiry panel’s website http://www.tempdatareview.org

            Also
            FYI

            A
            May 2015 NASA data update shows polar ice caps at five percent above the
            post-1979 average in extent.

            James
            Taylor. “updated NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice
            Retreat.” Forbes, May 19 2015. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-ice-not-receding-after-all/.

          • sweetolbob

            OK, then create a non-flatulating grass for grazing.
            And Carbon di Oxide was chosen as a culprit because every move made by a human or an animal produces it and its immense amount makes it easier for governments to tax.

          • William George

            As long as everyone omits water vapor co2 will do for fear mongers,… and I find that peer reviews are nothing but an old boys club, where like minds think alike and any not in line are made out to be fools.

          • Whaledriver

            Obviously left unregulated by bureaucrats in the days of the dinosaurs.

          • Grassroots

            Dinosaurs didn’t congregate in large numbers in a confined space. It’s the aggregate of hundreds of cattle in feedlots that’s creating the CO2 increase.

          • Whaledriver

            You’re picking fly poop out of the pepper.

            Cows in feedlots? Do you have any idea whatsoever the amount of carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide a single volcano emits? Your sense of outrage is way out of proportion. Use common sense and your brain, not talking points.

          • pineapple

            Do you believe in global warming?
            >
            > Worth reading!
            > This is very interesting—(no one has challenged this)
            >
            > Author’s credentials:
            > Ian Rutherford Plimer
            > is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at
            > the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the
            > University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral
            > exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific
            > papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.
            >
            > Born
            > 12 February 1946 (age 68)
            > Residence
            > Australia
            > Nationality
            > Australian
            > Fields
            > Earth Science,Geology,Mining Engineering
            > Institutions
            > University of New England,University of Newcastle,University of
            > Melbourne,University of Adelaide
            > Almamater
            > University of New South Wales, Macquarie University
            > Thesis
            > The pipe deposits of tungsten-molybdenum-bismuth in eastern
            > Australia(1976)
            > Â
            > Notable awards
            > Eureka Prize (1995, 2002),Centenary Medal(2003), Clarke Medal(2004)
            >
            > Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?
            > Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!
            > If you’ve read his book you will agree, this is a good summary.
            >
            > PLIMER: “Okay, here’s the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in
            > Iceland. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR
            > DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five
            > years to control CO2 emissions on our planet – all of you. Of
            > course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying
            > to suppress – it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant
            > requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us
            > humans and all animal life. I know it’s very disheartening to
            > realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have
            > accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of
            > driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till
            > midnight to finish your kids “The Green Revolution” science
            > project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies,
            > using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your
            > toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing
            > at home instead of abroad. Nearly getting hit every day on your
            > bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00
            > light bulbs.
            >
            > Well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the
            > tubes in just four days. The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s
            > atmosphere in just four days – yes, FOUR DAYS – by that volcano in
            > Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to
            > reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active
            > volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time –
            > EVERY DAY. I don’t really want to rain on your parade too much, but
            > I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the
            > Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the
            > atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years
            > on earth. Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year –
            > think about it. Of course, I shouldn’t spoil this ‘touchy-feely
            > tree-hugging’ moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic
            > activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and
            > cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely
            > insignificant efforts to affect climate change. And I do wish I had
            > a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the
            > matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and
            > Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon
            > in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every
            > year. Just remember that your government just tried to impose a
            > whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus ‘human-
            > caused’ climate-change scenario. Hey, isn’t it interesting how
            > they don’t mention ‘Global Warming’ anymore, but just ‘Climate
            > Change’- you know why?
            >
            > It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past
            > century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their
            > pants down. And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an
            > Emissions Trading Scheme – that whopping new tax – imposed on you
            > that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It
            > won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure. But,
            > hey, relax and have a nice day anyway.

          • Whaledriver

            Excellent! Ian Plimer is but one of a number of vulcanologists who have been silenced by the global warming crowd. Almost any volcanologist can tell you that a single volcano in a day can erase decades of extremely-expensive schemes to reduce carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide in the environment that are produced by man. Fellow scientists in Iceland revealed the SO2 and CO2 emissions from a single Icelandic volcano and have, as a result of their findings (confirmed by NASA) have literally been banned by the global warming fanatics.

          • pineapple

            Liberals also congregate in large numbers (Hillary rallies) Maybe this should be outlawed.

          • William George

            It’s not Hilary’s rallies that are going to raise CO2 levels, no one showed up!

          • pineapple

            But the ones who showed up were full of gas.

          • Mr Rollo

            I love my Steakums ! (‘specially with some eggs fried in butter!

          • pineapple

            What about liberal farts? They should all take gas ex.

          • Grassroots

            I imagine that most humans fart. Even you, pineapple. Liberal, conservative, moderate, everybody farts. I believe that is critical to one’s health, the ability to discharge stinky gases.

          • pineapple

            Actually, I never fart. I just “pass gas”, which is much more “appropriate”.

          • pineapple

            “By EPA’s own public admission, concentrations of ozone have actually
            declined by 33 percent from 1980 to 2013, during the same period of time
            when the U.S. population had increased by 40 percent and the economy
            had more than doubled in size,”

            ‘Most expensive regulation in history’
            New Obama power grab set to kill 1.4 million jobs

            The Obama administration is just weeks away from imposing a new ozone particulate standard that manufacturers say will cripple jobs and productivity in the U.S. and leave some firms and industries clinging to life.
            The National Association of Manufacturers HYPERLINK “http://www.nam.org/Issues/Energy-and-Environment/Ozone-Regulations/Ozone-Report-Executive-Summary-20140730/” released a study suggesting the standard would cost the U.S. 1.4 million jobs and $1.7 trillion in productivity by 2040 if the standard is lowered from 75 parts per billion to 65 parts per billion. The EPA could bring it as low as 60 parts per billion, which the study projects would be catastrophic.
            For business owners like Summitville Tiles CEO David Johnson, the change would be devastating. The firm is based in Ohio, which relies heavily on manufacturing for jobs and economic growth. HYPERLINK “http://www.insidesources.com/new-ozone-standard-will-be-economically-crippling/” Johnson recently wrote a column explaining what’s at stake if the Obama administration get’s it’s way.
            “We have 88 counties in this state and under this new ozone standard, all 88 of these counties would be out of compliance, just by the stroke of the pen of this executive order of the president,” Johnson said.
            In addition to burdening existing manufacturers, Johnson said the new ozone standard would stifle new business.
            “It would essentially stop any new projects from going forward unless there were reductions in emissions in other plants in other areas,” he said. “In other words, there’s a trade-off. If you’re going to add new emissions, you’d have to reduce emissions somewhere else. So (if you) shut down a factory or a company goes out of business, then and only then would you have a permit to expand your particular operations.”
            According to Johnson, American manufacturing has never received a gut punch like this from its own government.
            “This is not a bill that’s been passed by Congress, hasn’t been vetted, hasn’t been studied,” Johnson said. “It’s simply President Obama and his EPA’s effort to combat what they believe is global warming. So yeah, it would be the most expensive regulation in the history of regulations.”
            Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with David Johnson:
            CONTROL ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.16
            Johnson said the looming change is especially maddening when the EPA admits ozone levels are vastly improving over the past few decades.
            “By EPA’s own public admission, concentrations of ozone have actually declined by 33 percent from 1980 to 2013, during the same period of time when the U.S. population had increased by 40 percent and the economy had more than doubled in size,” he said.
            Summitville Tiles has been in business for four generations and for over a century. In recent years, however, Johnson said, a 700-member workforce has been trimmed considerably just to stay afloat. The firm is the only remaining member of its national trade association from the ceramic tile industry because most cannot compete with cheaper materials flooding the market from China and Mexico.
            Johnson said the ozone regulations are part of a looming double whammy that could leave manufacturing in dire straits.
            “This new Pacific trade agreement is a perfect example of another whole new category of countries that will be given preferential treatment to ship product into the United States to undermine and undercut our products,” Johnson said.
            He added, “At the same time, we’re being hammered by these new regulations and those will be very costly to comply with.”
            A public comment period is open before the ozone standard goes into effect, but Johnson thinks voicing opposition to the EPA is a waste of oxygen. He said the only way to fight back is at the ballot box.
            “Another four years of Obama thinking could do irreparable harm to this country’s ability to compete and its ability to provide jobs,” Johnson said.
            He said 2016 must be a change election for the sake of American jobs.
            “I urge people to get involved in this next election and make sure that there’s a change in the White House,” he said. “That’s where it’s coming from. This is government by fiat, not government by deliberative democratic process.”

            Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/09/most-expensive-regulation-in-history/#xAfvCcmlRmfSkQWb.99

          • Whaledriver

            That, and a few dozen, epic volcanic eruptions worldwide.

          • Whaledriver

            All those dinosaurs probably died out because they didn’t use adequate sunblock.

          • Mr Rollo

            Just checked some out. You nailed it !

          • John Doe

            And to think that several decades ago when I lived in So. Cal. The EPA was trying to pass a law that required farmers to outfit their cattle with “Fart Bags”, to collect the emissions. OH, the hypocrisy of the liberals will never end.

          • sweetolbob

            “Maw, the hired hand wont change the fart bags no more. I’m agonna have to fire him, I recon. “

          • Ronney

            Excellent post sir

          • Whaledriver

            Thank you. Don’t hear those words often!

          • aschark

            You’ve just got another one!

          • NERDWORLD PROBLEMS

            Don’t forget about the ocean temperature fudging. They put the sensors on ships and buoys to collect water temps, problem with that was the ones on the ships were placed in the back where the water temps were higher because the water had already passed through to cool the engines. If the temps differed from the the ones on the buoys they would scale UP to bring the numbers in line with the ones from the ships. That is just flat out lying. They scaled up as much as 16 degrees at a time to get the #’s they wanted.

          • Grassroots
          • HardingDies

            When an independent group surveyed the sites, they found about 30% were placed to give ARTIFICIALLY HIGH readings. When these stations were taken out of the calculations, the temperatures didn’t change!

          • Bob Wexler

            All you have to do is look at the computer records from th NOA weather stations from a thousand years ago to confirm their claims.

          • Grassroots

            So, tell us, what’s your background in the scientific world? Have you written any papers on climate change or the migration of birds or the ingredients that go into flying an airplane? Feel free to link us to the articles you’ve written. By the way, where do you get your news? From accredited scientific journals? White papers published on scientific topics? Or are you still counting on Fox & Friends and Breitbart for the “best” in scientific reporting? You do know that the earth is round and not flat, though, don’t you? That’s another of those scienterrific facts.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Have you checked into the cost associated with the removal of the shrink wrap from your brain?

            It might be a worthwhile investment in order to get oxygen rich blood cells to your brain.

            Sort of like a ‘breath of fresh’ for the thought process thingie.

          • Grassroots

            I love shrink wrap! I just discovered it’s usefulness this year when packing up storage items. The wrap is transparent so I can see at a glance what’s inside.

            As far as my brain, I had no idea that a baby is born with shrink wrap around their brain. So how did you remove the shrink wrap from your brain? Is it a painful and expensive process?

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            NOT all babies are born with it.

            The tendency seems to run in families when both parents still have their shrink on and are comfortable in their existence.

          • Mustafa Curtess

            You ask a lot of questions – without a word about how you validate your vast and unchallengeable knowledge. In case you missed it: An impressive number of those “scientific studies” are being debunked, and much of the “statistical” data is being exposed as seriously flawed (and in some instances patently fraudulent.)

          • Grassroots

            I’m taking a college class on climate change. I’ve been involved in climate change lobbying groups and soaked up information. Right now I’m reading two excellent books, one an overview of weather, the other a primer on global warming. Plus I’ve been following environmental news for 20 years.

            None of that makes me an expert, but I do search out information from peer-reviewed journals in climate science rather than dubious websites where unqualified people make unsubstantiated claims that don’t ring true with scientific studies and beliefs.

          • pineapple

            You need to read “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years” by Singer and Avery, “Climategate” by Sussman, and “Red Hot Lies” by Horner, or you can remain uninformed.

          • Grassroots

            I haven’t looked them up yet, but are those authors climate scientists? If not, and if they haven’t pursued climate science as an official discipline, then I’m not going to waste my time reading literature by people motivated by popular opinion, not facts.

          • pineapple

            Also, may I recommend “Climategate” by Sussman, or “Red Hot Lies” by Horner.

          • kevin

            Was watching a documentary on the Vikings and they lived in Greenland and Iceland and it was way warmer then than it is now in those places. The Polar bears survived and THE PLANET IS STILL HERE!? That is fact. Not politics.

          • William George

            Sorry, but peer reviews are no different than a bunch of fools, they seldom differ, I’ve watched weather for about 60 yrs of my life, as being in the merchant marine it’s important to know what to expect at sea, and the only real changes, are that the seasons are no longer definable, but in the end nature balances it’s self out.

          • Grassroots

            “Peer reviews are no different than a bunch of fools”? You don’t trust science, eh. You think everyone in every field of endeavor lies all the time, is that right?

            Tell me, who do you trust to tell the truth?

          • William George

            I believe in the facts, and have no problem with science and its out come when it’s unbiased, and you have to remember that he who pays the piper calls the tune, so far when it comes to climate change just about everything is based on computer models, and as of yet there isn’t one that comes close to the comprehension of the complexity of our worlds weather, the IPCC for yrs has fudged the results on all sorts of facts, in order to accomplish their agenda..

          • William George

            Peer reviews are like a chain, what is the strongest end ?

          • Grassroots

            So what you’re saying is that the scientific method has been abandoned and you can’t trust anyone in the field of science because they’re all in it for personal gain?

          • William George

            Fallow the money, even scientist have to eat, and live like the rest of us, so some one needs proof,, that their product is the best, the scientist will conduct his results that will show his client that he’s right.

          • Grassroots

            And thus ruin his or her reputation as a credible scientist, eh. So no one ever hires them again because their results can’t be trusted. Yeah, makes total sense. Go for that one big payoff that will set you up for the rest of your life, because you’ll never be hired again when people find out you falsified results. A brilliant plan.

          • William George

            “””A small number of academics-for-hire publish articles touting the safety of questionable products and impacts, like glyphosate and second-hand smoke, in journals known to offer the illusion of peer review. Industry research has a long history of finding its way into scientific journals and, from there, influencing courts, governments, and medicine. While these kinds of publications are in the minority, ethical researchers must sound the alarm when such ghostwriting and corporate influence is apparent.”””
            This come from an article out of Cornucopia , well known for their work on organic subjects, and research.

          • Grassroots

            Your point being that’s it’s only a small number of the millions of scientists who falsify results? I can agree with that.

          • William George

            Unfortunately it’s the squeaking wheels that get the grease, and define small, there are some 30,000 who don’t believe in the climate change as a man made catastrophe.

          • Grassroots

            Out of millions of scientists in the world, 30,000 is a tiny number. The scientists whose experiments and conclusions really matter are climatologists, not physicists, biologists, mathematicians, chemists, et al.

            Choosing to believe a pediatrician over a heart surgeon, regarding open heart surgery, would most likely result in a bad outcome.

            Choosing to believe an industrial chemist, for example, over a climatologist, regarding climate truths, is an equally egregious error.

          • Grassroots

            Of course there’s always a few bad apples. That’s true in every profession. Some responders have characterized all the climate scientists as liars. I imagine the ethical scientists vastly outnumber the crooked ones.

          • William George

            That line of thinking is about the same as what we know as common wisdom from a herd mentality, when in the end it’s all about money !

          • William George

            Would you pay someone, to prove that your wrong ?

          • Grassroots

            Would I pay someone to prove my findings? Do you mean would I submit my work for peer review, knowing my test results are wrong, bogus, fabricated? That would be pretty stupid, don’t you think?

            My question to you, would you give up your entire career in defense of your own doctored findings? Look what happened to the idiot doctor who claimed that vaccinations are linked to autism. He was discredited internationally. Definitely a big payoff for him, eh, no one every trusting his word again. Another example where crime pays off big time. Not.

          • William George

            Your what I call an intellectual Idiot, because many doctor’s and scientist have had their lives destroyed for exposing views, that go against what is referred to as common wisdom, I find it strange that people who have been vaccinated, have a such fear that those who aren’t vaccinated will make them sick, of the very thing they got vaccinated for.! now that is Stupid !, and as for Autism, don’t you find it strange that those who haven’t been vaccinated in the past don’t tend to have Autistic kids.
            You probably think, like most people that Polio has been almost Eradicated but it hasn’t, today they have given it a few new names that’s all. and before you comment on it, check out the history of polio, coincidentally it diminished about the same time that DDT was stopped.

          • William George

            Grassroots, you said about a month ago that,” I’m taking a college class on climate change. ” are your teachers already opinionated, or open minded on the subject that they teach, are you being subjected to what’s already in the Box, the notion that the Question, is a forgone conclusion, from your posts I’d say that the answer is yes.
            When I replied ” Would you pay someone, to prove that your wrong ? ” you missed the question, and that was the point, who would fund you to show them that they were wrong, they would expect that you would find evidence that would support the idea that they hired you for, and if you didn’t then your reputation would be screwed, when your hired by a company, you work for them, not for their competitor.

          • Whaledriver

            NASA was found to have cooked the data as well in several audits of its studies.

          • Grassroots

            Who was it again who audited that data? Could you provide a link for educational purposes? Thank you.

          • Compte de Grasse

            Don’t forget when the Russians hacked the IPCC emails at University of East Anglia. They uncovered communications between the “scientists” modifying their data & graphs to create the hockey stick rising on the right to support Eco-Nazi agendas.

          • Dan

            Agree 100 %

          • Ronney

            Amen, just like the job numbers. All Ovomit could do is inflate numbers to his lies for the week.

          • Whaledriver

            Then the Department of Justice met with the Attorney Generals from 7 states — all of whom wanted the DoJ to make questioning of global warming a felony?

            The Department of Justice doesn’t make laws, but hundreds of these global warming sycophants are clamoring that even QUESTIONING their theories should become a felony for the express purpose of the “doubter” no longer having the ability to legally vote.

            They want to actually jail the owners of companies who doubt global warming exists, or is as bad as the claimants demand us to believe.

            Ladies and gentlemen: this is not science. It’s actually 1934 and Hitler is emerging from the social chaos created by Dindu Nogud o’dumbo. Question Herr Hitler and you can get locked up — even if Hitler isn’t one, but many, people.

            C’mon, people. Use your head for something other than to put food into it.

        • pineapple

          Washington Post
          Report on Global Warming

          The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water
          too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.
          Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto
          unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as
          far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

          Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced
          by mountains of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely
          disappeared.

          Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have
          never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is
          predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.

          * * * * * * * * *

          P.. S. – I apologize, ….. I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and
          published in The Washington Post; almost 95 years ago.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            I haven’t checked lately, but….

            In the last couple of years at least one ‘cruise chip’ that took tourists down to the Antarctica coast was trapped in ice, the ice breaker that went to rescue the ship had in’t own problems with massive ice buildups.

            BUT!!!

            All is not lost!

            You found a ‘source’ that feeds your mantra so you can spew stupid all over the table and pretend to be smart.

            Just as an aside….

            You DID NOT provide a link, just mentioned the WAPO. THE most discredited rag in the world right alongside the NYT.

          • pineapple

            Perhaps you didn’t read the last sentence. Try again, this time with your glasses on.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            My most sincere apologies Kind Sir.

          • pineapple

            Apologies accepted.

          • Grassroots

            And all of that continues up to the present day. Not getting any better, either. There are already island nations that have had to permanently evacuate from their homes because their islands are rapidly being overtaken by the sea.

          • Herb1949

            name ONE.

          • Grassroots
          • Herb1949

            Really don’t understand how this is possible. I lived in San Diego for almost 20 years, until summer of 2016. Spent a lot of time on the waterfront. The level of the bay has NOT changed in all of that time.

            Sounds more to me like the islands are being worn away by the ocean than the ocean is rising.

          • Grassroots

            I’m not going to argue about it. You can read the articles as well as I can. I will say that it is true that warmer air causes a rise in sea level. Expansion of water molecules or something like that. I’m not a scientist and can’t adequately explain that phenomena. I leave it to the people in that field to cite statistics and studies and outcomes. I invite you to check it out and counter or affirm what I have written.

          • Mustafa Curtess

            That is true! It’s convenient to ignore simple erosion.

          • pineapple

            Apparently you did not read the last paragraph.

          • Grassroots

            I did read the last paragraph. That’s why I said that that continues up to the present day. The industrial revolution created a new higher level of air pollution, with additional CO2 buildup from the coal and fossil fuel industries and giant animal feedlots (methane release from feedlots is huge). CO2 is what is causing the earth to warm up and the oceans to become more acidic.

            You might be more familiar with the term, greenhouse gases. Margaret Thatcher, in 1989, and George H. W. Bush, in 1990, were convinced of the reality and threat of global warming.

            Carbon dioxide is a gas that can trap heat and make a planet warmer than it would be otherwise. That’s a good thing to a point. It’s the excess CO2, the result of human activity (fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, gas), that is adding significantly more heat-trapping gas to Earth’s atmosphere.

            As long as we continue producing excess greenhouse gases, we can expect the rising carbon dioxide concentration to warm our planet, with the warming becoming more severe as we add more carbon dioxide.

          • pineapple

            During the Medieval Warming Period, atmospheric temperatures were so warm that Norse explorers were able to grow crops in areas of Greenland that are now covered by ice and snow.

            The Medieval Warming Period was followed by a mini ice age, during which rivers in Europe froze over, and crop failures occurred, resulting in severe food shortages.

            This mini ice age was followed by another warming period which began around 1900. This is also when the industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots the excuse that carbon fuels cause global warming.

            You need to read “Unstoppable Warming Every 1500 Years” by Singer and Avery, and “Climategate” by Sussman.

          • pineapple

            Top scientists start to examine fiddled global
            warming figures

            The Global
            Warming Policy Foundation has enlisted an international team of five
            distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry

            By
            Christopher Booker

            Last
            month, we are told, the world enjoyed “its hottest March since records
            began in 1880”. This year, according to “US government scientists”,
            already bids to outrank 2014 as “the hottest ever”. The figures from the US
            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were based, like all the
            other three official surface temperature records on which the world’s
            scientists and politicians rely, on data compiled from a network of weather
            stations by NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN).

            But
            here there is a puzzle. These temperature records are not the only ones with
            official status. The other two, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University
            of Alabama (UAH), are based on a quite different method of measuring
            temperature data, by satellites. And these, as they have increasingly done in
            recent years, give a strikingly different picture. Neither shows last month as
            anything like the hottest March on record, any more than they showed 2014 as
            “the hottest year ever”.

            Back
            in January and February, two items in this column attracted more than 42,000
            comments to the Telegraph website from all over the world. The provocative
            headings given to them were “Climategate the sequel: how we are still
            being tricked by flawed data on global warming” and “The fiddling
            with temperature data is the biggest scientific scandal”.

            My
            cue for those pieces was the evidence multiplying from across the world that
            something very odd has been going on with those official surface temperature
            records, all of which ultimately rely on data compiled by NOAA’s GHCN. Careful
            analysts have come up with hundreds of examples of how the original data
            recorded by 3,000-odd weather stations has been “adjusted”, to exaggerate the
            degree to which the Earth has actually been warming. Figures from earlier
            decades have repeatedly been adjusted downwards and more recent data adjusted
            upwards, to show the Earth having warmed much more dramatically than the
            original data justified.

            So
            strong is the evidence that all this calls for proper investigation that my
            articles have now brought a heavyweight response. The Global Warming
            Policy Foundation (GWPF) has enlisted an international team of five
            distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry into just how far
            these manipulations of the data may have distorted our picture of what is
            really happening to global temperatures.

            The
            panel is chaired by Terence Kealey, until recently vice-chancellor of the
            University of Buckingham. His team, all respected experts in their field with
            many peer-reviewed papers to their name, includes Dr Peter Chylek, a physicist
            from the National Los Alamos Laboratory; Richard McNider, an emeritus professor
            who founded the Atmospheric Sciences Programme at the University of Alabama;
            Professor Roman Mureika from Canada, an expert in identifying errors in
            statistical methodology; Professor Roger Pielke Sr, a noted climatologist from
            the University of Colorado, and Professor William van Wijngaarden, a physicist
            whose many papers on climatology have included studies in the use of
            “homogenisation” in data records.

            Their
            inquiry’s central aim will be to establish a comprehensive view of just how far
            the original data has been “adjusted” by the three main surface records: those
            published by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss), the US National
            Climate Data Center and Hadcrut, that compiled by the East Anglia Climatic
            Research Unit (Cru), in conjunction with the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre for
            Climate Prediction. All of them are run by committed believers in man-made
            global warming.

            For
            this the GWPF panel is initially inviting input from all those analysts across
            the world who have already shown their expertise in comparing the originally
            recorded data with that finally published. In particular, they will be wanting
            to establish a full and accurate picture of just how much of the published
            record has been adjusted in a way which gives the impression that temperatures
            have been rising faster and further than was indicated by the raw measured
            data.

            Already
            studies based on the US, Australia, New Zealand, the Arctic and South America
            have suggested that this is far too often the case.

            But
            only when the full picture is in will it be possible to see just how far the
            scare over global warming has been driven by manipulation of figures accepted
            as reliable by the politicians who shape our energy policy, and much else
            besides. If the panel’s findings eventually confirm what we have seen so far,
            this really will be the “smoking gun”, in a scandal the scale and significance
            of which for all of us can scarcely be exaggerated.

            More
            details of the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s International Temperature
            Data Review Project are available on the inquiry panel’s website http://www.tempdatareview.org

            Also
            FYI

            A
            May 2015 NASA data update shows polar ice caps at five percent above the
            post-1979 average in extent.

            James
            Taylor. “updated NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice
            Retreat.” Forbes, May 19 2015. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-ice-not-receding-after-all/.

          • pineapple

            During the Medieval Warming period, atmospheric temperatures were so warm that Norse explorers were able to grow crops in areas of Greenland that are now covered with ice and snow.

            The Medieval Warming Period was followed by a mini ice age, during which rivers in Europe froze over, and crop failures caused a severe food shortage.

            This mini ice age ended around 1900. This is when the Industrial Revolution started, which gave global warming zealots an excuse to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            If fossil fuels are the cause of global warming, what caused the Medieval Warming Period which occurred before the advent of fossil fuels?

            You need to read “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years” by Singer and Avery. Also read “Climategate” by Sussman.

          • pineapple

            Claim of consensus is fake’
            Plus: Science group ‘reviewing its stance on global warming’ after 160 physicists sign petition

            The following letter signed by five physicists was sent to all 100 U.S. Senator’s on October 29, 2009. The letter is reproduced in full below;

            A GAGGLE IS NOT A CONSENSUS
            You have recently received a letter from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), purporting to convey a “consensus” of the scientific community that immediate and drastic action is needed to avert a climatic catastrophe.
            We do not seek to make the scientific arguments here (we did that in “http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/11/02/team-of-scientists-open-letter-to-us-senators-claim-of-consensus-is-fake/a/1745/Scientists-Write-Open-Letter-to-Congress-You-Are-Being-Deceived-About-Global-Warming–Earth-has-been-cooling-for-ten-years” an earlier letter, sent a couple of months ago), but simply to note that the claim of consensus is fake, designed to stampede you into actions that will cripple our economy, and which you will regret for many years. There is no consensus, and even if there were, consensus is not the test of scientific validity. Theories that disagree with the facts are wrong, consensus or no.

            We know of no evidence that any of the “leaders” of the scientific community who signed the letter to you ever asked their memberships for their opinions, before claiming to represent them on this important matter.
            We also note that the American Physical Society (APS, and we are physicists) did not sign the letter, though the scientific issues at stake are fundamentally matters of applied physics. You can do physics without climatology, but you can’t do climatology without physics.
            The APS is at this moment reviewing its stance on so-called global warming, having received a Team of Scientists’ Open Letter To U.S. Senators: petition from its membership to do so. That petition was signed by 160 distinguished members and fellows of the Society, including one Nobelist and 12 members of the National Academies. Indeed a score of the signers are Members and Fellows of the AAAS, none of whom were consulted before the AAAS letter to you.
            Professor Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
            Professor Fred Singer, University of Virginia
            Professor Will Happer, Princeton University
            Professor Larry Gould, University of Hartford
            Dr. Roger Cohen, retired Manager, Strategic Planning, ExxonMobil
            List of 160 signers of the APS petition available at HYPERLINK “http://tinyurl.com/lg266u” http://tinyurl.com/lg266u
            Climate Depot’s Related Links:
            HYPERLINK “http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/11/02/team-of-scientists-open-letter-to-us-senators-claim-of-consensus-is-fake/a/1745/Scientists-Write-Open-Letter-to-Congress-You-Are-Being-Deceived-About-Global-Warming–Earth-has-been-cooling-for-ten-years” Scientists Write Open Letter to Congress: ‘You Are Being Deceived About Global Warming’ — ‘Earth has been cooling for ten years’ – July 1, 2009
            HYPERLINK “http://climatedepot.com/a/2213/Climate-Revolt-Worlds-Largest-Science-Group-Startled-By-Outpouring-of-Scientists-Rejecting-ManMade-Climate-Fears-Clamor-for-Editor-to-Be-Removed”

            Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed! – July 29, 2009
            HYPERLINK “http://www.examiner.com/x-7422-Cobb-County-Conservative-Examiner%7Ey2009m8d14-Prominent-scientists-push-to-revise-physics-society-climate-statement” American Physical Society to review its current climate statement after a group of 80 prominent physicists petitioned APS revise – May 1, 2009
            American Physical Society editor conceded a HYPERLINK “http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/no_consensus_and_no_warming_either” “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists – 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Polish-Academy-of-Sciences-Questions-Gores-Man-Made-Global-Warming-Theory-43618922.html” Polish National Academy of Science ‘published a document skeptical of man-made global warming’ – April 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03/02/global-warming-pause-print.html” Climate Fears RIP…for 30 years!? – Global Warming could stop ‘for up to 30 years! Warming ‘On Hold?…’Could go into hiding for decades,’ peer-reviewed study finds – Discovery.com – March 2, 2009
            March 2009 U. S. Senate Report: HYPERLINK “http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3” ‘More Than 700 International Scientists Dissenting Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims’
            HYPERLINK “http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Facts&ContentRecord_id=09DF614E-802A-23AD-46C9-8A90FCB5569A” India Issued a report challenging global warming fears – 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=865DBE39-802A-23AD-4949-EE9098538277” Canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is “settled” – 2008
            Japan Geoscience Union symposium 2008 survey HYPERLINK “http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25182520-2703,00.html” ‘showed 90 per cent of the participants do not believe the IPCC report’
            HYPERLINK “http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2008/08/report-from-33d-intl.html” Skeptical scientists overwhelm Prestigious Geologist conference in Norway in 2008: ’2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC’ & see full reports HYPERLINK “http://www.rightsidenews.com/200808191759/energy-and-environment/global-warming-skeptics-prominently-featured-at-international-scientific-meeting.html” here & HYPERLINK “http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2008/08/another-prominent-scientist-dissents.html” here
            HYPERLINK “http://www.oism.org/pproject/” Petition signed by over 31,000 American scientists: ‘There is no convincing scientific evidence that greenhouse gasses are causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating’ – 2009

          • Grassroots

            97% of CLIMATE SCIENTISTS, the people who spend their life studying climate, are in agreement about global warming.

            They base their belief on discernable facts gathered as evidence. The climate scientists used an agreed-upon scientific method to arrive at discernable facts. Scientists from all over the world, different cultures, different countries replicated the outcomes.

            In addition, others scientists conducted peer reviews of climate scientist white papers and agreed with the findings.

            You can dispute that with the belief that no one anywhere can be trusted to be honest and ethical, but that’s extremely dangerous and erroneous thinking.

            No expert would intentionally lie about evidence in a scientific study (unless they were criminally minded) because that would render everything they find in the future to be suspect. If a scientist can’t be trusted to be honest and truthful, her/his career is over.

          • pineapple

            There are pseudo scientists who receive government grants to study global warming. They have an incentive to hype man made global warming in order to continue receiving government grants.

            Some have been caught falsifying data to justify their claims. Google “East Anglia temperature fraud fraud.”

            For your edification concerning the global warming hoax, I recommend that you read the following books.
            “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years” by S. Freed Singer and Dennis T. Avery
            “Warming and Environmentalism” by Christopher Horner
            “The Really Inconvenient Truths” by Ian Murray
            “Climategate” by veteran meteorologist Brian Sussman.
            “Red Hot Lies” by Christopher C. Horner.
            Since you will probably choose to remain ignorant and not read any of these books, I offer the article below. (I gave credit to the author lest you accuse me of plagiarism.)

            Your Move, Global Warming Alarmists, Science has Exposed Your Unwarranted Hysteria.
            By Peter Ferrara
            Who will decide American public policy on the issue of potentially catastrophic man caused global warming? The answer is you and me, through the democratic process that governs our country.
            So spare me the comments saying Shut Up, you are not a scientist and your commentary here is not peer reviewed scientific literature, so you have no business even talking about it. That is an anti-democratic, brown shirt tactic meant to foreclose public discussion and debate, which has been the dominant strategy of those trying to force their unwelcome ideological agenda on the rest of us through this issue. What does that alone tell you about who is right about the actual science?
            But citizens participating in the democratic process do have a responsibility to become informed about the scientific debate over global warming. And that is my function here in focusing on the publication this week of Climate Change Reconsidered II, authored by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), and published by the Heartland Institute. The NIPCC
            “is an international panel of scientists and scholars who came together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change. NIPCC has no formal attachment to or sponsorship from any government or governmental agency. It is wholly independent of political pressures or influences and therefore is not predisposed to produce politically motivated conclusions or policy recommendations. NIPCC seeks to objectively analyze and interpret data and facts without conforming to any specific agenda. This organizational structure and purpose stand in contrast to those of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is government-sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. solution.”
            I can attest to you that the team of 50 scientists producing the 1,200 pages of calm, reasoned, dispassionate science in the report did achieve their goal of objectively analyzing and interpreting data and facts without conforming to any specific agenda. They carefully demonstrate the inconvenient facts about the world’s climate discussed below, and when you have that any politicization would just detract from the presentation, as Al Gore shows in his global warming political harangues.
            The report is “comprehensive, objective, and faithful to the scientific method.” Moreover, it is “double peer reviewed,” in that it discusses thousands of peer reviewed articles published in scientific journals, and is itself peer reviewed. That is in sharp contrast to President Obama’s own EPA, which issued its “endangerment finding” legally authorizing regulation of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, without submitting the finding to its own peer review board established by federal law precisely for that purpose. What were they so afraid of if 97% of scientists supposedly agree with them? That violation of federal law has now been challenged in court, and is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. But this would not be the first time that the Administration of this lawless President has openly flouted the law.
            Check out Climate Change Reconsidered II for yourself. It is the top, No. 1, presentation of the other side to the Democrat Party’s controlled media on the issue. If you want to see what that is, this is your one stop source. If you personally want to believe that using the traditional, carbon based energy sources that have fueled the Industrial Revolution and modern prosperity will destroy the planet, and that we can fuel the modern economy with windmills and dancing on sunbeams at minimal net cost, then it is your personal right to pursue your alternative reality fully ignorant of your errors.
            The authors of the report do not deny that there is some effect of warming the planet from mankind’s emissions of CO2, primarily from use of traditional carbon fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas. The argument is over how big of an effect that is, how that compares to natural causes of climate change, and whether the human caused effect threatens a catastrophe, or even severe distress, to human civilization and the environment. The conclusion of the report is that the U.N.’s IPCC has exaggerated the amount of global warming likely to occur due to mankind’s emissions of CO2, and the warming that human civilization will cause as a result “is likely to be modest and cause no net harm to the global environment or to human well-being.” The primary, dominant cause of global climate change is natural causes, not human effects, the report concludes. “The hypothesis of human-caused global warming comes up short not merely of ‘full scientific certainty’ but of reasonable certainty or even plausibility,” the report states.
            The fundamentals of the argument is that CO2 is not some toxic industrial gas, but a natural, trace gas constituting just 0.038% of the atmosphere. For readers disadvantaged by excessive exposure to the party propaganda organ called the New York Times, that is less than 4/100ths of one percent. The report states, “At the current level of 400 parts per million, we still live in a CO2-starved world. Atmospheric levels (of CO2) 15 times greater existed during the pre-Cambrian period (about 550 million years ago) without known adverse effects,” such as catastrophic global warming.
            Moreover, CO2 is actually essential to all life on the planet. Plants need CO2 to grow and conduct photosynthesis, which is the natural process that creates food for animals and fish at the bottom of the food chain. The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere that has occurred due to human emissions has actually increased agricultural growth and output as a result, causing actually an increased greening of the planet. So has any warming caused by such human emissions, as minor warming increases agricultural growth. The report states, “CO2 is a vital nutrient used by plants in photosynthesis. Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere ‘greens’ the planet and helps feed the growing human population.”
            In addition, the temperature impact of increased concentrations of CO2 declines logarithmically. Or as the report says, “Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2)…exerts a diminishing warming effect as its concentration increases.” That means there is a natural limit to how much increased CO2 can effectively warm the planet, as the effect of more and more CO2 ultimately becomes negligible as CO2 concentration grows. Maybe that is why even with many times more CO2 in the atmosphere in the deep past, there was no catastrophic global warming.
            What has been devastating to the theory of catastrophic, man caused, global warming is that there has been no significant increase in global temperatures for 16 years, even a slight cooling in more recent years. Yet, during that time mankind’s emissions of CO2 that were supposed to be causing global warming continued to explode, with one third of all CO2 added to the atmosphere since the industrial revolution occurring during this period. The Economist magazine shocked the global warming establishment with an article in March that began with this lede:
            “OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, ‘the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade. . . .’”
            The facts recounted above are not in actual dispute, even though several commenters relying on too much party controlled media were shocked to hear last April that anyone could think that global warming stopped 16 years ago. But these facts already demonstrate that the theory of catastrophic, anthropogenic, global warming is dubious at best.
            Climate Change Reconsidered II explains the argument of the UN’s IPCC that the world is still threatened with global warming catastrophe, which will be repeated in the next IPCC report in a few weeks. What is shocking is to see is how meager the argument is for the great, global warming bogeyman. You are welcome to check out the UN report to see for yourself.
            The supposedly scientific foundation for the IPCC argument is based on the temperature projections of 73 global climate models developed by various scientists favored by the IPCC. These climate models are not science. They are literally speculative stories about the climate, especially since exactly zero of the models have been validated by past temperature experience. The scientific method involves testing a falsifiable hypothesis with experiments and evidence. Speculative model projections do not involve any such falsifiable hypothesis, and are not an exercise of the scientific method.
            Even the modelers themselves recognize and admit that their models are not even designed to produce predictions of future temperatures, but just “what if” projections of the results of unproven assumptions, to provide some indications, not scientific proof, of possible future scenarios. The Climate Change Reconsidered report states, “The science literature is replete with admissions by leading climate modelers that forcings and feedback are not sufficiently well understood, that data are insufficient or too unreliable, and that computer power is insufficient to resolve important climate processes.”
            Moreover, none of the models take into account the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean temperature cycles resulting from the churning of colder water from the deep to the surface, where it is warmed by the sun, which have been shown to affect global temperatures. None of the models take into account as well solar activity cycles such as variations in solar magnetic fields or in the flux of cosmic rays, which are also known to significantly affect climate, and have produced major climate changes of the past, such as the Little Ice Age, particularly pronounced from roughly 1650 AD to 1850 AD, the Medieval Warm period from about 950 AD to 1250 AD, during which global temperatures were higher than today, and the early 20th century Warming Period from 1910 to 1940 AD.
            These are the reasons why the projections of all of these models have now diverged so strongly from the actual temperatures experienced over the past 15 years, and further back for most all, even back to the 1980s, as shown in the nearby graph. The actual atmospheric temperatures as recorded by U.S. weather satellites and weather balloons are shown by the two lines at the bottom of the graph, connecting the squares or the circles. The average of the temperature models is the solid line going through the spaghetti of lines representing the projections of each of the models, well above the real world temperatures, with the divergence growing and growing. The source of that graph is Dr. Roy Spencer, award winning NASA scientist monitoring the global atmospheric temperatures as measured by U.S. satellites, and a contributor to Climate Change Reconsidered, as produced for testimony before the Environment and Public Works Committee of the United States Senate. Spencer, R.W. 2013. Statement to the Environment and Public Works Committee, 19 July 2013, Washington, DC. This sharp divergence of the projections of the IPCC models has been another devastating development for the theory of catastrophic, man caused, global warming.
            Besides the models, the UN’s IPCC tries to argue that circumstantial evidence is consistent with its theory of catastrophic, man caused global warming if it were true. This again is not the scientific method. As Karl Popper explained, “observations in science are useful to falsify hypotheses, and cannot [rigorously] prove” any hypothesis is correct. In other words, the true scientific method involves a null hypothesis which is the logical opposite of the hypothesis being explored, and is assumed correct until the evidence proves it false. That is because experimental or physical evidence can only rigorously prove something false, not prove it true.

            But as Climate Change Reconsidered explains, “the IPCC assumes its implicit hypothesis [catastrophic, man-caused global warming is real] is correct and that its only duty is to collect evidence and make plausible arguments in the hypothesis’s favor.” This is political science, not actual science.
            Climate Change Reconsidered shows that it is the evidence that the IPCC tries to marshall in favor of its catastrophic, man caused, global warming hypothesis that is false, falsifying the hypothesis. The Climate Change report states, “Global sea ice cover remains similar in area to that at the start of satellite observations in 1979, with ice shrinkage in the Arctic Ocean since then being offset by growth around Antartica.” In other words, polar ice is not melting or disappearing globally. The report adds, “The data on global glacial history and ice mass balance do not support the claims made by the IPCC that CO2 emissions are causing most glaciers today to retreat and melt.”
            The report also states, “Sea level rise is not accelerating. The global average sea level continues to increase at its long term rate of 1-2 millimeters per year….Unusual sea-level rise is therefore not drowning Pacific coral islands, nor are the islands being abandoned by ‘climate refugees.’” In other words, yeah, the sea level has been rising. Exactly the same as it has been for thousands of years, since the end of the last actual Ice Age.
            Moreover, the pattern of global temperature change has not followed rising atmospheric CO2 since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. It follows instead the up and down patterns of ocean churning temperature cycles and of solar activity, such as sun spots that were so influential in causing the Little Ice Age that ended roughly a couple of hundred years ago. That is one reason why Climate Change Reconsidered concludes that natural causes, not human factors like CO2 emissions, have predominated in causing climate change.
            Indeed, the Climate Change Reconsidered report states, “The recently quiet Sun and extrapolation of solar cycle patterns into the future suggest a planetary cooling may occur over the next few decades.” That follows my own reporting in recent columns in this space of the potential rise of a long term temperature decline based on these solar trends, which is the first reporting on such developments anywhere near the establishment press in increasingly repressed America. Much of our national press these days behaves voluntarily in regard to the Obama Administration the way that the old Soviet press used to do under compulsion in regard to the old communist dictatorships in the now dissolved old Soviet Union.
            One small town California columnist published a criticism of one of my previous columns on this subject in this space using a chart fed to him by a local environmental propagandist. The hapless local dutifully published the chart fed to him showing a line supposedly representing global temperatures in the 20th century with a sharp upward slope. The line was drawn through the real temperature history of cyclical ups and downs representing the actual cyclical natural causes of global temperature changes. But the overconfident local columnist, gleefully repeating that the graph proved man caused ultimately catastrophic global warming was real, also failed to notice that the scale on his graph was in tenths of a degree. He should go back to his source and ask for a graph of 19th century global temperature increases on the same scale, which would show a far sharper upward slope. Were CO2 emissions higher in the 19th century than in the 20th? Or maybe the dominant factor was the end of the Little Ice Age in the 19th century, a natural not human cause.
            Enough has been discussed already to logically and indeed scientifically disprove, or falsify, the invasive theory of catastrophic, anthropogenic global warming. But Climate Change Reconsidered provides another 1200 pages of logical and scientific argument, backed up by thousands of peer reviewed citations that could not all be discussed here. If your head hurts at this point because of overexposure to the New York Times and the resulting disconnection or alienation from reality, Climate Change Reconsidered is the cure for what ails you.

          • Grassroots

            The drawing below shows how humans have effected global warming. An excess of CO2 is the problem. Much of that excess is stored in the oceans, thus raising the ocean levels, because warmer temps expand the water molecules. Trees and foliage store CO2, yes, but cutting down huge forests around the world, and especially in the Amazon, means that there are millions fewer trees to take in the CO2.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5e901bdea6bea955c246fbb86f815f35703b2ba86b05bf960fcc2148d7913714.jpg

          • pineapple

            The
            April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
            The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
            the use of fossil fuels.

            Following is an excerpt from the article:

            “Melting
            ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
            land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
            level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
            sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
            example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
            East Coast.

            The
            biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
            They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
            losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
            seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
            rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

            The
            author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
            occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
            fuels.

            Also,
            there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
            able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
            and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
            which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
            current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
            industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
            to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            Global
            warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
            earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

          • pineapple

            “No expert would intentionally lie about evidence in a scientific study (unless they were criminally minded)…”

            Google “East Anglia Temperature Fraud.”

          • Grassroots

            There are exceptions to every rule, of course.

          • Grassroots

            What you are talking about is called a conspiracy theory.

            From FactCheck.org [http://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/nothing-false-about-temperature-data/]:

            “The supposed manipulation of data by East Anglia and other scientists in the Climategate affair also proved to be completely unfounded, as we have written twice before.

            “Climate skeptics claimed that leaked emails between many climate scientists around the world showed there was a coordinated effort to inflate the global warming signal in temperature data. But several separate investigations, including by the U.S. Department of Commerce Inspector General and the Environmental Protection Agency, found no such wrongdoing or manipulation.

            “According to one independent international investigation, known informally as the Oxburgh Report: “We saw no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit and had it been there we believe that it is likely that we would have detected it.” Palmer’s spokesman said the congressman had no comment on the repetition of this claim in spite of the repeated exonerations.

            “Palmer’s claim that “we are building an entire agenda on falsified data” has no basis in evidence. Even as these claims of data manipulation have resurfaced, there is now a general consensus that 2014 was the hottest single year since temperature record keeping began. This same conclusion has been reached by NOAA and NASA, the Japan Meteorological Agency, and the World Meteorological Organization. The United Kingdom’s Met Office said that 2014 was among the warmest along with 2010, but it is impossible to say for sure that 2014 was hotter. According to NASA, nine of the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 2000, with 1998 the lone exception.”

          • pineapple

            The
            April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
            The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
            the use of fossil fuels.

            Following is an excerpt from the article:

            “Melting
            ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
            land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
            level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
            sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
            example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
            East Coast.

            The
            biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
            They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
            losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
            seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
            rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

            The
            author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
            occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
            fuels.

            Also,
            there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
            able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
            and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
            which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
            current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
            industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
            to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            Global
            warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
            earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

          • pineapple

            The
            April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
            The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
            the use of fossil fuels.

            Following is an excerpt from the article:

            “Melting
            ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
            land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
            level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
            sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
            example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
            East Coast.

            The
            biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
            They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
            losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
            seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
            rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

            The
            author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
            occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
            fuels.

            Also,
            there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
            able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
            and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
            which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
            current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
            industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
            to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            Global
            warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
            earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

            P.S. Fact Check and Snopes are fake fact checkers.

          • pineapple

            The
            April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
            The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
            the use of fossil fuels.

            Following is an excerpt from the article:

            “Melting
            ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
            land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
            level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
            sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
            example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
            East Coast.

            The
            biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
            They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
            losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
            seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
            rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

            The
            author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
            occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
            fuels.

            Also,
            there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
            able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
            and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
            which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
            current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
            industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
            to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            Global
            warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
            earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

          • pineapple

            Apparently you didn’t read the last paragraph. Try again.

        • Grassroots

          Science is science. Consensus is not science. But scientists can reach a consensus about what science is. Science is what works. Science is jet planes. Science is rocketships. Science is air conditioning systems. Science is brain chemistry. Science is hybridizing flowers. Science is chemistry and physics and geometry and mathematics and language and facts.

          Science has proven, contrary to the beliefs of the uneducated, that recent climate change is human related. You can insist that the thousands and thousands of scientists, the majority of scientists, across the world are united in some grand plan to pull one over on non-scientists. Logic and reality will prove you wrong.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Science has proven, contrary to the beliefs of the uneducated, that recent climate change is human related.

            yeah… the “Reality Deniers” would have you believe that it’s “settled science” when in reality, ‘consensus’ only exists in the echo chambers of your mind.

          • Grassroots

            I’m not sure what you mean in your last paragraph. Are you saying that consensus exists only in my mind, only in the minds of the vast majority of scientists who believe that humans have accelerated climate change, or only in the minds of some other group?

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            again with the ‘vast majority’ generalization again?

            Focus group creations certainly do seem to stick in your mind don’t they?

        • gotabgood

          Earth Sets a Temperature Record for the Third Straight Year

          https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/science/earth-highest-temperature-record.html?_r=0

          >

          Heat wave: 1,000+ records fall in USA in a week

          http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/weather/news/story/2012-06-27/heat-records/55874718/1

          And if you really want to be informed… you can type in any question you want in google search…. now if your just blowing “hot” air and think you are pinning us against the wall with your PROVE IT ATTITUDE…. there is more proof out there than you have time to read.

          Here is a neat little website made for skeptical, just about all questions are answered there, including the 1970 ice age… or whatever year it was…

          https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Yawn.

            There are more Polar Bears than there were 50 years ago.

        • Compte de Grasse
          • CrustyOldGeezer

            they aren’t interested.

            They just come here to whine, cry, snivel, then bitch and call names.

            That is their entire playbook.

          • Mustafa Curtess

            Paychecks too for most of them – if you think about it.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            It is curious how much Soros pay to the cellar dwellers isn’t it?

            Where do I sign up?

            Most liberals never do quite understand when they are told to go to hell in a manner that has them looking forward to the trip.

      • Arizona Don

        Your statement is flawed and so is your thinking. The climate has entered a cooling period. Is there climate change of course that is the only part of the whole equation that has been settled. Is that climate change man made? There is absolutely no proof that is true. It is true the warmest period in the United States since records have been kept was in the 1930’s. False information is used to reach any other facts which makes it false facts. GIGO is the only explanation. The “man made climate warming” is total hogwash!

        What happened to the report that by 2010 New York City would be flooded and the Florida Keys would be underwater?

        The climate change scare being perpetrated upon people around the world is only to place more controls on people and bilk them for everything they can.

        Better luck next time!

        • Jmanjo

          That is exactly correct! Nature itself can effect the climate bigger and quicker than humans ever could and the climate change (Global warming) nuts were out to steal us blind with the help of the liberal loons! No more! We don’t have to waste jillions of dollars trying to convince the Sun to change its ways! Ain’t gonna happen!

          • Joseph C Moore USN Ret

            Please look up the terms “affect” and “effect”. I understood your point, and you are correct (even with the grammatical error).

          • Jmanjo

            I get caught by that all the time and since “most” people don’t know either I stopped looking it back up…sorry about that! I’ll try to be better.

          • Arizona Don

            Since you wrote that to me I guess you are asking me that last paragraph question.

            Yes you are correct! That certainly is possible climate change has been around for millions of years perhaps longer. Just no man made climate change since we have not been around for millions of years I think it is safe to say we, human beings, did not effect the climate millions of years ago.

            You did notice I said regarding climate change“of course that is the only part of the whole equation that has been settled.” Climate change was around before the dinosaurs. Man made climate change however, is not settled at all only because these hustlers like Al Gore don’t want it to be and he has talked so many other non-thinking progressive communistic democrats into thinking he is right it may never be. This climate change debacle has proven one thing for sure. The difference between stupid and ignorant. Stupid is having been taught and ignoring the teaching. While ignorance is having never been taught. These who promote man made climate change are stupid.

            The research I have done refers to temperatures being much hotter when the dinosaurs were around then now. I also have discovered it is colder temperatures we should fear much more then warmer temps. Cold kills everything. If humans are effecting climate (which I totally disagree with) it may be good for the earth not bad for it. These people are repeating over and over these lies and I guess they think they can convince us without facts if they just keep repeating the same lies. The only thing settled about man made climate change is that it is not settled.

            A final though for you. Those promoting global warming (remember the old days a couple years ago) were saying the antarctic ice cap was melting. My research shows in order for such a thing to happen the temperature would have to raise over a hundred degrees F. And even at that it could take hundreds of years to expose the land underneath.

            Have a nice day.

          • Grassroots

            The reason scientists are calling this round of climate change human-made is because of the rapidity of the changes, not so much that there are changes. The landscape has, of course, dramatically changed since the Ice Age, which killed off the dinosaurs and altered global geology.

            This recent acceleration, though, is unprecedented in history. I’m including a link to the National Geographic site, showing maps of projected continent changes due to rising oceans and a video of the effect climate change is having specifically on Glacier National Park. Changes will wipe out entire species in the oceans and on land because of changes in food supply, warmer temperatures, and other factors. (Just as an aside, the rising acidity of the oceans is also having a deleterious effect on coral beds, fish, and other sea creatures.)

            http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/

          • Arizona Don

            Of course there are many theories as to why or how the dinosaurs were killed off. Even “when it happened” seems to cause some confusion. However, I had never heard the theory that they were killed by the ice age.

            Like I said before in order for the antarctic ice cap to melt the temperature would have to increase over a hundred degrees F. I suspect that is not going to happen anytime soon. By the way I have seen the map before but thank you anyway.

            According to several scientists much more astute then I climate change is on a cycle of around 30 years. Some say more or less. They base their theory on sun spots for warming and the lack thereof for cooling. Of course other factors actually interfere with regularity but for the most part the cycles are regular. Mans present on the planet has little effect on the overall warming and cooling of earth.

            Here is a link to provide some thought to the climate change theories. http://search.aol.com/aol/video?q=Dark+Winter+Documentary+&v_t=client97_searchbox

          • Grassroots

            I don’t recognize the agency or group that created the videos as being connected to any scientific authority. Do you know who made the videos?

            Regardless, the ice cap is already melting more rapidly than at any time in the past. If you checked out the link I included, you can see profound shrinkage of the glaciers. It is the rapidity of soaring changes that is of great concern. At no time in recorded history has there been such a rapid increase.

            Back to the dinosaurs, the History Channel posits two of the prevailing theories of why the dinosaurs died – icing up at the Poles or a meteor crashing onto the planet. So I technically misspoke when I attributed dinosaur die-off to the Ice Age. The following is more information on the two theories:
            1. “But in the late Mesozoic Era that corresponds with the extinction of the dinosaurs, evidence shows that the planet slowly became cooler. Lower temperatures caused ice to form over the North and South poles and the oceans to become colder. Because the dinosaurs were cold-blooded–meaning they obtained body heat from the sun and the air–they would not have been able to survive in significantly colder climates.”
            2. “Then in 1991, a massive meteor crater 110 miles in diameter was discovered on the edge of the Yucatán Peninsula, extending into the Gulf of Mexico. The Chicxulub Crater, as it was dubbed, was named for a nearby village. Scientists believe the bolide that formed it was roughly 6 miles in diameter, struck the earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated. The heat would have broiled the earth’s surface, ignited wildfires worldwide and plunged the planet into darkness as debris clouded the atmosphere. Miles-high tsunamis would have washed over the continents, drowning many forms of life. Shock waves would have triggered earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.

            “The resulting darkness could have lasted for months, possibly years. It would have plunged the earth’s temperatures into the freezing zone, killing plants and leaving herbivores with nothing to eat. Many dinosaurs would have died within weeks. The carnivores who feasted on the herbivores would have died a month or two later. Overall, the loss of biodiversity would have been tremendous. Only small scavenging mammals that could burrow into the ground and eat whatever remained would have survived. The iridium layer plus the Chicxulub Crater were evidence enough to convince many scientists that the bolide impact theory was credible. It explained much of what previous theories could not.”

          • Arizona Don

            How the dinosaurs died is not important at this time and makes no difference to me. I only stated I had never heard that theory. However, I am quite familiar with the story.

            I suspect you did not watch at least the first Dark Winter trailer or you would have see John Casey’s credentials. Who made the video is not of any importance it is content that matters John Casey did that. He also has a documentary Dark Winter. It is well worth the cost.

            Perhaps you would understand Dr. Don Easterbrook’s explanation better.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI&feature=player_embedded

            There is no ice cap at the arctic the ice there is frozen sea water. There is no substantial ice melt at the antarctic. As I said the temp at the south pole would have to increase by 100 degrees F to cause a melt there. In millions of years there has been no antarctic ice melt.

          • Grassroots

            I appreciate your opinion. Thank you for sharing. I did look at the entire video, and I have researched John Casey’s credentials. Casey does not have a background in climatology nor does he have experience in meteorology. Casey charges that this distinct lack of experience or relevant background is often attacked by his critics, and I agree with his detractors. He holds a B.S. in physics and math, as well as a MA in management, neither of which address climatology or meteorology.

            It’s easy enough to claim that NASA and the UN and former presidents and a clear majority of scientists around the world are all in cahoots and are making things up as they go along. I don’t agree that those agencies and governmental leaders and foreign countries are trying to fool us into believing what the Right apparently considers outlandish theories.

            In point of fact, John Casey is strongly supported by the fossil fuel industry, which obviously doesn’t want to reduce their man-made pollution because it costs them money. It seems their bottom line is money over health. I see industry regulation as a protection for not only our citizens but the citizens of the global community. His expertise, as he states in his profile, is “decades of experience in missiles, radars, computers, and space launch systems.”

            The Technical University of Denmark through it’s Space division maintains: “Scientists at DTU Space have extensive experience in the speedy procurement, use and distribution of satellite images of the sea ice in the polar regions. The images are used to monitor developments in the ice sheet, which in recent years has shrunk dramatically, and to find out how climate change is affecting the polar regions.”

            The article at this link is especially well done and includes links to many background articles that combine to make the case for global warming/rapid climate change. http://www.icsu.org/publications/communications-and-outreach/twelve-things-weve-learned-on-the-road-to-paris/twelve-things-weve-learned-on-the-road-to-paris

            Deforestation, industry emissions, animal farming, and other factors all contribute to the rise of CO2 levels in the atmosphere. That rise has been measured since 1958 from a location in Hawaii by, first, Dr. Charles D. Keeling, and subsequently by his son. From the publication: “The graph of the resulting data is known as the Keeling Curve: Keeling after the scientists, and curve because it is going up. By the 1980s, this data was supplemented with empirical research studying air bubbles trapped deep in Antarctic and Greenland ice caps. A sort of natural time capsule, the ice had encased the gases of previous eras allowing scientists to study its composition.”

            You contend that global warming in the form of climate change is a hoax, and you rely on the opinions of one man whose self-stated expertise is “decades of experience in missiles, radars, computers, and space launch systems.” He and his supporters defend a minority opinion and could be termed outliers in climate change research. I’m not saying their ideas have no merit. My biggest concern is that if they are wrong, which seems to be supported by the global majority opinion, waiting around for irrefutable proof puts the entire planet in jeopardy.

          • Arizona Don

            Have a nice day.

          • Mustafa Curtess

            Apparently, many life forms have become extinct in the inexorable process of nature long before the recognizable human species existed, and continually thereafter. I can not acceot that itbis incumbent upon humanity to artificially delay the naturally-scheduled demise of some life form. I am aware that at any given period in time – a “natural balance” can exist. But that does not confirm that nature can not, or shall not, restore balance with an alternate “symbiosis”.
            Given the volcanic (inconsistent) activity in the sea/ocean bed alone – it is unlikely that humanity can artificially prolong the life of certain coral reefs – regardless what sacrifices to our existence we arbitrarily make – including crippling our already fragile economies – or causing mass starvation that reduces global population significantly.
            I perceive a very dangerous arrogance in this topic that concedes our species far greater influence over nature than we are entitled to.
            Humanity’s sacrifices on behalf of Whooping Cranes, Brown Pelicans, Snail-Darters, etc. are a sad commentary on our “scientific community’s”ethical priorities.
            (While concern for genuine man-made disasters – like Exxon Valdes and the BP oil-spills no longer must be fully mitigated for in litigation.

          • Grassroots

            I hear what you’re saying. There are quacks and charlatans in the science business just like everywhere else.

            For a deeper understanding of why humans are causing such rapid changes, I would suggest doing research into the effects of increased CO2 on the environment and what is causing that substantial increase. CO2 is making the oceans warmer and more acidic, which is responsible for some of the coral die-off. That is a fact, which is a great deal stronger than just a theory.

        • J.B.Jacobs

          I spent some time in the AIR Force in Labrador, Newfoundland, Greenland and Iceland . We flew iceberg patrols along the coast. The supply ships have to move out into open water at night because for some reason the bergs and flows move in toward shore and we let them know when they were moving in or out.
          Ice bergs or flows only have about one fourth of the ice mass above water. Three fourth is below water, which means the ice takes up a greater volume when it is frozen. Ever have your water line freeze and burst when it froze? when the bergs and masses melt they take up less volume , so the ocean can’t rise, it has to go down as they melt.
          Think about this. At one time, most of the earth was grass and dirt. When it rained, it didn’t run off, it soaked into the ground. Now look at the millions of miles of paved road,streets and even buildings that cover the ground. The water cannot soak in, it runs off, into the storm drains, into the creeks and rivers which eventually end up in the ocean. Isn’t it possible that that could make the oceans rise?
          Just my theory. I have seen the winters getting warmer for a long time. Now I read where we are getting cooler weather. Isn’t it possible that the earth has always been going through a warming or cooling cycle since the earth was formed?

          • Compte de Grasse

            I own land in the Philippines on the Island of Bohol near Baclayon Cathedral, built in 1596 (documented by cornerstones). That same year, the Jesuit builders also constructed a pier far out from the church into the Bohol Straits (connects to the South China Sea). The formations of barnacles collected on the posts of the pier remain to this day AT SEA LEVEL after more than 400 years. The oceans are not rising.

          • Whaledriver

            The earth HAS been going through warming and cooling trends.

            Just a little information (provided in an historical context) on the last large cooling trend caused by the sun in what was called the “Dalton Minimum.”

            1787: The US Constitution ratified by the states.
            1789: George Washington elected as first president of the United States.
            1789: The French Revolution begins.
            1793: Dalton Minimum begins: Solar Cycle 4 Prime.
            1797: John Adams elected second president of the United States.
            1801: Thomas Jefferson elected third president of the United States.
            1803: Lewis and Clark begin to explore the northwestern United States.
            1803: The Louisiana Purchase negotiated with France.
            1807: Robert Fulton launches his steam-powered boat, the Clermont.
            1809: James Madison elected fourth president of the United States.
            1811–1812: The New Madrid earthquake strikes the Mississippi valley; the first quake occurs on December 16, 1811. It is the most powerful series of earthquakes in North American history — a series of three 8.0 temblors, plus many smaller ones.
            1812: The War of 1812 between the United States and England begins.
            1812: Napoleon invades Russia and suffers massive losses because of bitter winter weather.
            1815: The Mount Tambora volcano erupts, April 5, 10–11. It is the largest and deadliest volcanic eruption in recorded history at the time, claiming 90,000 lives.
            1815: Napoleon suffers loss at Waterloo on June 18.
            1816: The “Year without a Summer.” Bitter cold weather hits New England, and the destructive frost spreads as far south as Pennsylvania.
            1816: In May, a frost hits from New England down to Virginia, and in June, people go sleighing after a freak snowfall.
            1816: On July 4, Independence Day, another killing freeze strikes, with more snow and ice reported in Virginia.
            1816: In August, frosts and snow strike New Hampshire, killing off what few crops still survive. Two months earlier, temperatures there had been in the 90s.
            1816–1823: Hundreds of thousands die, possibly as a result of cholera that spreads from India to New York City, related to regional conditions from Mount Tambora’s eruption.
            1817: James Monroe elected fifth president of the United States.
            1825: John Q. Adams elected sixth president of the United States.
            1830s: A second wave of cholera strikes Europe, also possibly related to the Mount Tambora eruption. Hundreds of thousands more die, especially in France.

            Thousands die in New England from the cold and aftereffects, and thousands leave for Indiana and Illinois. The migration may have been a key factor in these areas becoming new states of the newly formed United States of America.

            The combined cold and heavy rain damage of 1816 causes potato, corn, and wheat crops to fail across Ireland and England and, along with collateral typhus outbreaks, thousands more die.

            Rapid temperature fluctuations are common and extreme, with reports of 90°F and higher temperatures plummeting to near freezing in a matter of hours!

            Crop prices skyrocket. For example, prices for oats, essential for horses (the main mode of transportation), go up 700 percent.

          • pineapple

            See “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years” by Singer and Avery. Also read”:Climategate: by Sussman.

          • Grassroots

            This article from National Geographic may help explain why and how the oceans are rising: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/sea-level-rise/

            This excerpt from the article offers a brief explanation:

            “The rise in sea levels is linked to three primary factors, all induced by this ongoing global climate change:

            “1. Thermal Expansion: When water heats up, it expands. About half of the past century’s rise in sea level is attributable to warmer oceans simply occupying more space.

            “2. Melting Glaciers and Polar Ice Caps: Large ice formations, like glaciers and the polar ice caps, naturally melt back a bit each summer. In the winter, snows, primarily from evaporated seawater, are generally sufficient to balance out the melting. Recently, though, persistently higher temperatures caused by global warming have led to greater-than-average summer melting as well as diminished snowfall due to later winters and earlier springs. This imbalance results in a significant net gain in the ratio of runoff to ocean evaporation, causing sea levels to rise.

            “3. Ice Loss from Greenland and West Antarctica: As with the glaciers and ice caps, increased heat is causing the massive ice sheets that cover Greenland and Antarctica to melt at an accelerated pace. Scientists also believe meltwater from above and seawater from below is seeping beneath Greenland’s and West Antarctica’s ice sheets, effectively lubricating ice streams and causing them to move more quickly into the sea. Higher sea temperatures are causing the massive ice shelves that extend out from Antarctica to melt from below, weaken, and break off.”

        • Dan

          Great Post ! Most forward and critical thinking people will agree.

          • Arizona Don

            Thank You.

      • Rob D

        Oh my god “climate change” ? What happened to the Global Warming moniker you mindless buffoon? Of course there is climate change; like there has been for eons. Brain dead zombie LibTard.

      • Global warming and global cooling has been happening for millions of years without our help! Climate change will continue to happen without the human race!!!

        • Joseph C Moore USN Ret

          The “climate change” proponents want to reduce carbon dioxide, which is ESSENTIAL to all plant life. Lowering it (if possible) would reduce crops. The “climate change” proponents also want to reduce humanity by the billions throughout the world. Plants take in carbon dioxide and emit OXYGEN, (an essential for human and animal life).

          • jimmy midnight

            CO2 levels become a limiting factor in plant growth and crop yields ONLY when available water and fertility elements are first optimized.

            My, of course facetious, suggestion: Let those who deny the obvious changes buy some nice new irrigation equipment for the world’s farmers and gardeners.

          • Joseph C Moore USN Ret

            Thank you, Jimmy.

          • jimmy midnight

            Thank YOU. Now maybe GODBlessRealAmerica and Jeffrey Cahoon and Rob D can buy new a new 4-inch inlet pump.

      • Kenny Albert

        It ain’t settled with me.

      • Janthony132

        Oh yea of little faith! A weak military will lead to getting our ass kicked, or were you too young to learn about Pearl Harbor???

      • Thinking-Out-of-the-box

        You should have asked God for a brain…………..

      • Compte de Grasse

        There are over 300 active volcanoes on earth, just one of these spews out more emissions than mankind has in all of recorded human history. Despite this, Nature deals with it and the Environment maintains its equilibrium. Earth IS NOT getting warmer if one studies real data recorded apart from Al Gore FICTION. The only “Idiot” in this conversation is the one You see in your mirror.

      • GODBlessRealAmerica!

        Maybe you should ask Satan for exorcism!

        One thing we know that Liberal racist thugs are rampant in America I hope Trump these Liberal thugs…this previous Liberal moron was a disgrace now we have a Real American President who will build America’s military, economy, create jobs, security, keep America safe and Make America great again!!!

        Who knows maybe one day we can have America free of Liberal Morons like Obama out of Real America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e103b4318718359ca3d2ed44eae1c567d2c3d0393742e9a25a834c49c59fa486.jpg

      • got my licence

        In 1998 when they state that the earth temp increased the surface temp on Mars also increased. So how did mankind do that? We did not, it is a solar cycle. By the way, plants require Co2 and give off Ox. You would think the greenies would be on board with a increase in Co2.

        • pineapple

          Maybe Greenies should just stop exhaling!

          • got my licence

            Works for me.

      • Deplorable wizard

        Germansmith,
        You are a koolaid drunk fool!

        “Excessive animal husbandry”? Do you really expect intelligent people to believe the tree hugging vegetarian lie that the number of cows and pigs and chickens raised for food and food products out number the animals that have been on this planet, producing methane gas, for millions of years? Hey, idiot, the native Americans killed off the mammoth, a primary food source for the short faced bear, also extinct, allowing the north american bison to reach populations estimated in the billions at one time.

        But with your logic, buff don’t fart.

        That’s just one hole in your “theory”, there are way too many holes in the man caused climate change ideal for it to be even considered viable.

        Any idiot that believes in that claim, must be considered sheep and not people any more. So it should be argued by your own “animal husbandry” statement, that you sheeple are the cause of climate change, and need to be eliminated.

      • Retired

        I see your BS getting a lot of support.

      • Chiefbuck

        The ‘consider the source’ rule triumphs again. Only a fool would believe much of what the left wing loons provide. The big picture temperature numbers provided over the years pretty well knock down the liberal democrats fund raising efforts again. So far I have not read or heard one word about ‘heat sinks’ playing a part in temperature increases in urban areas. Highways, large concrete and brick structures etc capture and hold huge amounts of heat no matter what the actual temperature is. Many are basically solar collectors. Need proof? Stand in front of an enclosed window even on a cold day.
        How about solar collectors that use water as a heat collector. A plumber told me that he had solar collectors that were so good that they even worked at night by using moonlight. They did work as long as the outdoor temperature was higher than the thermostat controller located inside hot water storage tank.

      • plt

        You need to grow up. in nov-thru dec 10 volcanoes became active in the ring of fire just one slowly releases 10 tons co2 per day . nature makes it own the plants thrive on it and need it. Before you open your mouth sit down and study a subject instead of spitting out bs you hear .Be responsible for real info not fake like our alphabet news stations!

      • sweetolbob

        Germman:
        Our forests are a renewable resource. Go preach to the jungle clearing Nations.
        CO2 is a gas necessary for life of plants and animals and produced in nature.
        And you must be a Vegan. Animal husbandry produces MEAT !

      • Ronney

        Let’s meet an discuss this face to face, in my mind he is God and your a slimy little weasel looking for that free ride.

      • Wayne_63

        YOU TALK ABOUT THE EARTH IS GETTING WARMER. WELL, IN 1909 IT WAS ONE OF THE WARMEST DAYS AND THAT RECORD HAS NOT BEEN BROKEN. TELL WHAT IT MADE THE EARTH SO HOT ON THAT SAY IN 1909? AMERICA IS NOT UNDER A BOBBLE, WANT ABOUT THE REST OF THE WORLD? THE REASON THE EARTH MAYBE GETTING HOTTER IS BECAUSE THE EARTH IS ROTATING ON IT AXES AND COMING CLOSER TO THE SUN!!!!!!! THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX WAS STARTED BY AL GORE, SO HE COULD MAKE BILLIONS ON CARBON CREDITS! THERE IS MORE ICE ON THE NORTH POLE AND THE EARTH HAS NOT RAISED 1/2 DEGREE IN THE LAST 200 YRS!!!!!

      • William George

        You should do some critical thinking and check out water vapor, and see if carbon dioxide is still the governing factor in climate change, I see it as a well orchestrated scam, a distraction for governments to avoid dealing with more urgent maters, and a redistribution of wealth by the UN (Useless Nations).
        Speaking of walls, have you seen the Mexican wall on their southern border.
        If God gave you a brain, you should try using it.

      • Mr Rollo

        Go away and melt, Snowflake.

      • William George

        I cut down a few trees on my property and I’m still waiting for the snow too melt, the total amount of carbon dioxide, that we put in the air it only comes to about 1/10 of one %, hardly and deal maker,, when compared to the rest of the atmosphere and 98 % of it being Water Vapor and controlled by the sun. the only Question that is settled is that the Sun God is in control.
        The only reason that Mexico doesn’t want a wall on their northern border is so that they can go north and make money that they can then send back to invest in the Mexican economy, and they don’t have to worry about creating more work at home, less welfare. you should see the wall they already have on the their southern border.

      • pineapple

        The
        April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
        The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
        the use of fossil fuels.

        Following is an excerpt from the article:

        “Melting
        ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
        land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
        level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
        sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
        example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
        East Coast.

        The
        biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
        They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
        losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
        seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
        rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

        The
        author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
        occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
        fuels.

        Also,
        there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
        able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
        and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
        which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
        current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
        industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
        to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

        Global
        warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
        earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

      • William George

        Are you sure that CO2 is the culprit, because when I when to school back in the mid to late 50’s I learned that the atmosphere contained about 98% water vapor and about 1/10 of 1% co2 hardly a smoking gun, unless you omit water vapor to make a big deal out of nothing

  • GODBlessRealAmerica!
  • C.Henry

    President Trump should look at all agencies , as we all know they are all loaded down
    with fluff and pet projects.

    Good , stop wasting money on the EPA and it’s agenda, we pump billons in and the on
    regulations and concerns while rest of the world spends pennies no regulations and they
    are the major contributors to pollution .

  • overandone

    I caught Obama trying to break into my gun safe to steal my AR 15’s, Eric Holder was driving the getaway car. It’s true! I had just gotten home from my death panel meeting and caught them pealing out of my driveway in a Prius, they were shouting, alllah ‘akbar as they sped away. Really! So SAD!

  • SouthernPatriot

    For we taxpayers, funding man-made global cooling, err man-made global warming, err man-made global climate change, is a waste of money and always has been. For the researchers, this is a great bargain, to receive grants and money for faking information, and by twist and turn, coming up with “scientific evidence” to confirm this erred hypothesis. For the globalists-communists who want to give undeveloped despots and countries money transferred from industrialized countries, this is another way to control people.

    Cut out the sham and use the saved monies to repair America’s infrastructure, build our southern wall and fence, hire new border patrol and ICE agents, completely renovated veteran’s care and build new VA hospitals, give working people and small businesses a tax cut, and other things that actually help the USA become Great Again!

  • Sailor l71

    We have a much more immediate threat.

    • Arizona Don

      Of course you’re right! However, you don’t understand why these libs have to concentrate on things like climate change and global warming. You see when someone fails at everything if they point out a non-existing problem and can convince enough people it does exist they can say this is how its solved and it makes them look successful even when they aren’t. If the problem does not exist it cannot be solved so the failure turns into success.

      • Sailor l71

        I understand only too well. That is why i said what I said. Global warming whether aided by man or not is not going to be changed , the earth will adapt as always. We are at the brink of zealots firing a nuke at someone. That is global the real global warming.

        • Arizona Don

          Absolutely right!

  • Retired Chief Petty Officer

    One of the quickest and best moves he could make is to disarm all these non-police agencies. When police actions are needed, the alphabet agencies should be required to call upon the county sheriffs, individuals who are elected by the people to be their law enforcement agency. Take all the ammunition and weapons amassed by entities such as FEMA, EPA, etc. by giving them to the National Guard and/or military reserve forces and return the non-military ammunition to the open market by allocating a portion of the weapons and ammunition to the U.S. Citizen.

    The citizens are the group to whom the Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. Make the citizens show their birth certificates to obtain the arms/ammo, or their Naturalization papers if they are first generation immigrants who ARRIVED legally.

    • Janthony132

      Good idea Chief!

      • Maryrchamberlin

        Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj684d:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj684d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash684MarketNetGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!mj684d:….,…….

    • Joseph C Moore USN Ret

      Good points chief! May you have fair winds and a following sea in your retirement.

    • Dan

      Sir not all sheriffs in every state can enforce the crimes code or the vehicle code. For example sheriffs in Pennsylvania do not enforce laws. They deliver summons, PFA’s and do court duties like check for firearms and court entrances. On the other hand the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources have state park rangers that have the same training as a municipal or state police officer and they do have the authority to enforce all the laws in the Commonwealth. The game and fish commission officers main functions are to enforce the game and fish rules.
      I get your idea of where to take weapons and ammo from but the organizations would have to be handled according to their function which may not be evident by the name of the agency.

      • Mathew Molk

        I’m all for taking law enforcement away form the game wardens and all the other “green hornets” – Leave police work to experienced policemen. We have enough problems with them with every cowboy out there thinking he is Matt Dillon.

        If you need to use police powers to enforce a law,,,,Call a cop just like any other citizen.

        Poaching Dear or taking too many trout is hardly a shootin’ offense.

        • Fedup

          The only reason I don’t agree with taking the firearms away from game wardens is because they are trained in law enforcement and the people they go up against are hunters. Hunters always have some kind of a weapon on them and that would leave them vulnerable

          • sweetolbob

            Fedup:
            The broad arrest powers given to Game Wardens is seldom used out of the field of hunting, fishing,trapping, and trespassing.
            They need it for just those pursuits.

          • Fedup

            Thank you for validating my point. I have met game wardens while hunting and feel if they are going to do their jobs 45-50 miles from a paved road (we hunt in the middle of the state of Nevada- no city or pavement for up to 50 miles) they need a way to protect themselves against someone with a high powered rifle. We can’t expect them to bring a knife to a gun fight.

        • sweetolbob

          Matthew:
          You are wrong,son. Game wardens have to enforce the laws against people breaking them in the deepest woods, with no help anywhere around, and the lawbreakers are always armed. You go catch a “dear” poacher, in the woods, at midnight or later with a police whistle and a badge. Good luck.

        • Larry Cowden

          You lack a basic understanding of the role of game wardens and the fish and game services. They are the law with regard to all matters pertaining to fish and game and the protection of those resources. And despite your disregard or total misconceptions about poachers being harmless, the opposite is the reality of it. Poaching operates on many levels besides the local idiots. Professional rings operate to take uncontrolled numbers of game for illegal black markets world wide. And those individuals prefer to shoot wardens and fish and game officers on site first! Hunters, fishermen and the rest of the outdoor community demanded and established the fish and game regulations to ensure future generations besides their kids could enjoy these activities. Since you never hunted, couldn’t care less about fishing, it won’t matter to you. Poaching is a shooting offense! And sometimes these officers are the only authority in deep rural areas where people need protection and law enforcement at all levels.

        • Dan

          What a jerk ! You are the typical asshole that thinks you know it all. That’s not the way it works in every state. In Pa there are several law enforcement agencies that have total enforcement power including crimes code and everything else. Apparently you can’t read,. In Pa sheriffs have no more power than what I said in the original entry. As far as game wardens everyone they come across is armed. But I guess you are a meter maid and don’t know that because you have strained yourself carrying all your bull shit.

        • Mr Rollo

          What good would a game warden be without arms? Show me just one, just one now, hunter with NO guns or bows and arrows. What were you thinking?

      • Jordan48

        You have a valid argument, but to arm members of the EPA and the IRS is a fools errand. The bureau of land management has no need for firearms because the FBI enforces the Federal Statutes here.

      • Wayne_63

        THE COUNTY SHERIFF IS THE TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN THE STATE!!!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE VOTED IN BY THE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!

        • Dan

          Not in every state jerk ! In Pa every agency has specific functions and in Pa they are not the top dog. Loosen your meter maids shirt cause its shutting off blood to your brain.

    • Mathew Molk

      No question in my military mind.

      Take all the weapons away from the alphabets (With maybe the exception of the FBI, ICE and CIA) and give them to the military.

      If they are not a DIRECT law enforcement agency they have no business with fire arms. – Call the cops if you need deadly force to enforce a law. And I mean a LAW,,,,Not something like an OSHA “violation” – Go to court, get a warrant and have the police serve it.

      NO GUNS FOR ALPHABETS

      • Whaledriver

        Excellent idea! Why the Social Security Aministration would need as much ammunition as it ordered is beyond me. The Post Office? Yeah, with all their bad service, it’s understandable…

        • Craig Vandertie

          You forgot the disgruntled postal employees who at times go postal, someone needs to protect them from their own kind.

        • Wayne_63

          AMERICANS DON’T NEED THE GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT USE, AMERICANS NEED TO PROTECT THEIR SELF’S FROM THE GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE POST OFFICE, EPA AND SOCIAL SECURITY DO NOT NEED 5 MILLION ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION!!!!!!!!!! OBUMMER BOUGHT ALL THAT AMMUNITION TO MAKE A SHORTAGE TO AMERICANS!!!!!!!

          • Whaledriver

            It is not five million rounds: the correct number is nine BILLION rounds of ammunition.

      • Obie Miller

        AMEN!!!

      • Whaledriver

        Yeah, and sell us the ammunition manufactured for those alphabet agencies. Over nine BILLION rounds of 9mm, 7.62x51mm, and 5.56mm ammunition.

        • Craig Vandertie

          I know right, there are those stories about government sanctioned Concentration camps for riotous citizens, wait, what am saying there are way too many riotous citizens, the mind controlled Looney Libtards.

        • Mr Rollo

          I cannot find any 22 mag shells in any local chain sporting goods stores. I have to go upcountry, like 20 mi, to a small ramshackle town to find any 22 mag shells. I think the grand US Govt, under the Bozo, collected them all. I live in Coatesville, PA.

          • Whaledriver

            Companies who tried to keep up with the federal orders for 9.2 BILLION rounds of rifle and pistol ammunition put off production of all other ammunition.

          • Mr Rollo

            AHA ! Thanks for that. Our great gov’t did that to prepare for upcoming martial law. And I thought martial law was a “conspiracy theory”.

          • William George

            I live in Ont. Ca. and 22 shells are rare here too.

      • Whaledriver

        Who would want to let an EPA employee loose with an automatic weapon, anyway? Or someone with the Post Office? Or, come to think if it…

      • Craig Vandertie

        You left out those who are still armed would include the ATF and DEA.

    • Chiefbuck

      Legend is again proven to be correct, all CPO’s are both intelligent and good looking. BUC

    • The Capatin

      Chief: I have a new name for “climate change”… It is called (wait for it)… the four seasons! *gasp* (Who would have guessed it)?

      • Craig Vandertie

        Geophysics and Astrophysics the sun, the earth and the other planets in our puny area of space, but the those with the tiniest minds by far are the mind controlled Looney Libtards and those employed by the EPA.

        • The Capatin

          And these fools act as if mankind is in total control of this sphere. Idiots.

          • Craig Vandertie

            As is the case with all Libtards who are deeply intranced by the Lamestream media who do nothing but spread nonsense to promote the personal interests of a select few, true science only exists if the changing of hands of money is not involved.

            It all started 5,800 years ago when man was intelligent enough to finally build permanent settlements, but the human brain would remain compartmentalized for another 4,800 years, plus hallucinogenic and psychotropic

          • The Capatin

            Amen, brother. AMEN!

      • Peter Osborne

        Aren’t they a singing group? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYBZqfOZiS4

    • Gary

      “Officer on deck!” Totally agree, sir, & thanks for serving!

    • sweetolbob

      Right Chief !
      The IRS, EPA,etc. are nobody’s armies ! Their need for ammunition is not even imaginable.
      It was surmised that the large quantities of ammo ordered by the government was done solely to continue the scarcity and high price to the public.
      It should ALL be recouped and sold to the public.
      Did Obama think the EPA, and the IRS were going to be his private army ?

      • Mr Rollo

        The gov’t under the arrogant Bozo also collected trillions of 22 mag bullets. I have to travel many miles to a hillbilly store to find any.

      • pineapple

        The government should also begin selling federal lands to the public.
        Why does the government need all of this land anyway?

    • Robert

      Completely agree. Most of the federal agencies that are armed should not be allowed NEAR a gun!

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      Another gift from clinton.

    • Whaledriver

      Chief, I have an even better idea. Give the weapons to the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Make America great — sharpshooters, that is — again!

    • Craig Vandertie

      FEMALE and the EPA by law should have never been armed in the 1st place

    • Mustafa Curtess

      “Show birth certificate” is a bit much. (I drank in bars between the ages of 18 and 21 with one I made myself – and we know that phony ones can be used to be POTUS.) Amusing anecdote there. They always asked for DL. “Don’t have one”. Why not? “Taken away from me”. What for? “DWI”. What’ll you have?
      Driver License and SSN and background checks ( or just a concealed carry license) works just fine. Don’t “fix” something that ain’t “broke”.

  • Dan

    Climate change was an experiment to try to bring the world together based on a common theme. Inventing a global killer gets everyone’s attention. Therefore the planet’s population of Christians, Muslims, Hindus and all other religions would come together for a common cause. It didn’t work, ask ISIS. At the same time, people like Al Gore stood to make alot of money, putting a price on and charging people for imaginary carbon credits.

    • Mark Lahti

      Hey there Dan. It is so refreshing to hear from someone with a logical mind and the common sense to apply it to the issues. You really nailed it squarely on the head. This thing called climate change is the biggest hoax ever pulled on mankind as a whole in modern history. If it was initiated with noble intentions at first (which I doubt), I would be extremely surprised. I believe that when politicians initiate anything this big there can only be one of two reasons. They are power and money. Al Gore has created this enormously complex and vague scheme that has made him rich all over again. You will notice that he is no where to be found anymore. I haven’t seen or heard a peep out of him since his pet money making scheme has been confronted and debunked by so many people. The part about this being settled science is settled only to this degree. It is nothing and is going nowhere. Well anyway it is good that many people like us can see through this hoax. God bless and keep up the good fight.

  • firehawk69

    If Germansmith and you other libtards had studied the correct science you would know that climate change is created and effected by water vapor, the sun and sun spot activity. If you knew anything about growing things, you would understand the “greenhouse gases” are named that because gardeners know they are required to grow things. The more co2 the more plants grow, which in turn gives back oxygen in the process. You jump start plants by growing them in GREENHOUSES…! Besides that there over 31 thousand scientists who have signed a petition stating our impact on the climate is at best minimal. Since 1947 there has been less than 1/2 of 1 degree of global temperature increase and of the last few years it has dropped that much.

    • Arizona Don

      You are absolutely correct however, I suspect you will not get through to Germansmith. It is impossible to reason with an unreasonable person (in other words a liberal). I considered using those same facts however, I was reasonably certain they would not believe anything that did not come from another lib. You are right but he will not think so.

    • Compte de Grasse

      Well written, sir. One can also take computations from the Table of Recurring Elements and know that the molecular weight of CO2 is heavier than the other majority gases found in air, O2 and N2. Gravity will draw most CO2 near the ground where it is consumed by photosynthesis. By the laws of physics, chemistry, and botany the notion that CO2 is somehow collecting and amassing in the atmosphere is just pure fantasy.

      • Grassroots

        Not amassing in the atmosphere, exactly. The oceans absorb a great deal of the excess CO2, which is causing sea level rise, bleaching of coral, and an increasing acidification of the oceans.

    • Whaledriver

      The trolls are either children in elementary school, or parolees in a halfway- house.

      • Grassroots

        Which one are you?

    • Grassroots

      We are close to 1.5 degrees of global warming. That is consistent worldwide. The real question is how can we reverse the warming to save the planet as we know it. Already there are island nations whose people have had to permanently leave their homes as sea levels have risen and covered their lands. As long as we continue to release excess CO2 into the atmosphere, global warming will increase. Excess CO2 is reflected back to earth and is absorbed by the oceans, raising water levels around the planet. Cutting down millions of acres of Amazon forests and Canadian primordial forests and other forests worldwide vastly reduces the planet’s ability to safely recycle the excess CO2.

      • firehawk69

        This normal libtard blah-blah-blah!

        • Grassroots

          Just because you don’t believe the truth doesn’t make the truth go away. Comprehensive denial of reality makes you the “tard,” not me.

          • firehawk69

            At least 31,000 scientists who signed a petition denouncing climate change-global warming caused by humans disagree with YOU!

          • Grassroots

            What kind of scientists? Climatologists?

            Do you know how many scientists graduate from our colleges every year? Hundreds, thousands in many different scientific areas, like biology, physics, animal management, botany, etc. I imagine there are as many different viewpoints as there are scientists. However, unless they specifically study climate science, their credentials for offering opinions on same are questionable.

            They’re allowed to disagree but that doesn’t make their opinions any more trustworthy.

          • firehawk69

            Once again,,koolaid drinking libtard…blah-blah-blah…! See ya!

  • Comanche7WL

    Here’s the fix. All liberals that feel that we as humans are destroying the Planet, commit suicide so the balance of us deplorables can live longer !

  • Harold

    Remember when Trump said he wasn’t going to take a salary? He just accepted his second paycheck.

    Remember when he said Mexico was going to pay for the wall? He has asked Congress to appropriate the $25 billion of taxpayer money to cover costs.

    Remember when he said he wasn’t going to go on vacation or play golf? 5 of the last 7 weekends he went on vacation and played golf, costing taxpayers $11.1 million.

    Remember when he said he was going to use American steel to build these dangerous pipelines? Russian steel arrived last week for the Keystone Pipeline XL.

    Remember when he said he wasn’t going to cut social security and Medicare? The Republican bill does just this.

    Remember when he said that nobody on his campaign had any communications with the Russian government? 7 of his people have now admitted they spoke and/or met with Russian officials, after they lied and got caught.

    Remember when he said he was going to divest from his businesses? Changed his mind.

    Remember when he said he was going to release his tax returns? Changed his mind.

    Remember when he said he was going to drain the swamp of Washington insiders? His cabinet is filled with lobbyists, oil and Wall Street executives.

    Remember when he said would defeat ISIS in 30 days? He doesn’t have a plan.

    Remember when he said that the Obamacare replacement would cover more people at lower cost? The AHCA that the GOP and 45 are now pushing; they now admit will cover fewer people at a higher cost.

    If you voted for him, please hold him accountable to what he promised you – for all of our sakes.

  • Eastcoastcoonass

    I agree we need to rethink, but if you think about it why the earth is getting warmer mite just be all the roads and buildings that we have all hold heat for many hours after the sun goes down. Maybe put some effort into making a product that will not hold are reflect heat. But we need to cut the waste of money and that is one way. Ut if any of you have every been out of the country you would see that they don’t care and or causing more problems than we or. So pull your head out the sand and stand behind the President and not some Muslim dictator. All past presidents have done nothing but pad their pockets with your and my money.

    • RichFromShowMe

      Spot On!

      Increases in civilization is the primary reason for global warming. Over the years I’ve seen few studies about this logical conclusion, probably, because it doesn’t pay as well as “cooking” historic data.

      All “researchers” who’ve made a good living (rip off artists?) over the past decade have ignored this simple fact and another fact; i.e., the earth has experienced 4 or 5 ice ages, and somehow, warmed up after each one. Wonder how many “researchers” blame those warm ups on cavemen buzzing around in their SUVs? 🙂

      Another cause of the warming climate are politicians, around the world, passing hot gaseous emissions from their mouths and being well paid for that skill.

      Carbon dioxide is plant food and plants create oxygen, essential for animal life.

      algore has some virtual trees for sale, if anyone is interested 🙂

  • rev_dave

    I suspect Mulvaney is correct about climate research being wasted money. But I think it’s wasted because whatever is happening is beyond the ability of mankind to fully understand or to manipulate without severe unintended consequences.

    Only God can change the climate trends. We can certainly do things to foul our air & water, and over time we can create local disturbances like ‘heat island’ cities, but He can stir up a storm that can decimate a continent. And we will never comprehend how it’s done.

  • Oldchopper

    Climate change, an everyday occurrence. Only greedy power hungry individuals would devise a way to abscond financial gain from it. For every ten that promote the idea humanity is causing cataclysmic destruction I’ll bet there are at least six making a fortune from the scam. There are so many false programs within our system of government it’s mind numbing. The system the past 100 years has figured a way to make Americans poor and then dump billions into phony programs to help them. Most recent case is the loss of 1.6 billion dollars within the Clinton Secretary of State bureaucracy. That’s 1.6 billion, with a B! And there’s no accountability for it. What’s a billion or two when they’re stealing trillions from under our noses.

    • Grassroots

      Climate change has been proven many times over and reflects information from over 5,000 weather stations around the planet. Weather is a local indicator, which can vary drastically from region to region. Climate change is the overall measurement of changes that are consistently occurring worldwide.

  • I’d like to see lots of these agencies shut down entirely. The government needs to get out of non-constitutional activities and get a lot smaller.

  • Jean Langford M.

    TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY….USE THE MONEY TO HELP PEOPLE LIVING ON THE STREETS…

  • Mynickelsworth

    I totally agree on the EPA. It is unconstitutional anyway, Article I, Section 8 lists all the areas in which Congress is empowered to make laws. Environment is not one!. In addition, the UN has admitted that the purpose of the Environmental protection (earthwarming/climatechange/etal) was designed to destroy capitalism, in short to destroy the USA. Why are we helping them? We ought to stop all payments to the UN, get Out of the UN and the UN out of the US.
    BTW, that same Section 8 also makes most of the executive Departments and many of the agencies Unconstitutional. But Congress continues to fund a make such laws. My estimate is that at least 50% of the federal government is unconstitutional and it may be as high as 80%.
    But then the Fed. Govt. has never, in my lifetime, cared much about governing by the Constitution as written and explained by the ones who wrote it. Oh, I’m just an 86 year old spring chicken.

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      The ONLY 4 Constitutional Cabinet agencies are the four that Washington began with.

      State – Foreign relations
      WAR- KEEP AMERICA SAFE
      Attorney General – Ensure the laws are ENFORCED, equally and fairly across the board.
      Treasury – to pay the damned bills and NOT spend more than collected.

      All others are political constructs to reward corrupt people that helped get corrupt politicians elected.

      “labor’ give the union the FULL WEIGHT AND POWER of the federal government to hold over the heads of the corporations that pay the bills.

      Boeing was denied permission to relocate a plant to a RIGHT TO WORK State because the unions could not FORCE union membership to work.

      try explaining that with a straight face.

      • Mynickelsworth

        The Constitution did give powers for a Commerce Department but it ONLY empowered the government to control commerce BETWEEN the States. That was to keep the North, the manufacturing part, from using improper method to gain over the South, which was agricultural, or Vice Versa. NOW the Government meddles in intra state, inside you state, trades. Totally Unconstitutional.
        The War Dept. is now the Dept of Defense and as you say, most all of the other Departments are Unconstitutional and LABOR is a biggie.

      • Grassroots

        Everything evolves with time. We are facing situations not even dreamed of by our foreparents. They didn’t have cars, rockets, refrigerators, electric stoves, telephones, fax machines, instant communication around the world…. We can’t live in the past.

        • CrustyOldGeezer

          Would you mind greatly if i asked for some clarification of your comment?

          I know what you wrote, but what I read was:

          “Well, they were corrupt in the past, and now we have to allow them to remain corrupt, wasting our money and letting them run roughshod over the People and shred the Constitution.”

          So, do you see the need to clarify what you meant?

          • Grassroots

            Corruption in the past, if any, (and whatever that might amount to, at least in your own mind), is not what I’m talking about. New, more detailed and accurate information and measurement instruments have vastly improved our understanding of the forces that affect our planet.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            So, who was the person on the top of Mt Sneffels in Western Colorado that was keeping track of the average temperatures year round in 1286?

          • Grassroots

            Climate in the ancient world can be deduced from ice core samples deep within the glaciers, among other evidence.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Incidentally, you do realize this thread is about the Administrative cabinets in the government?

          • Grassroots

            Oh, really? Gosh, I thought the discussion was about “Budget Architect: “Waste of Money” to Research Climate Change,” and the validity of the EPA. My bad.

    • Grassroots
      • Mynickelsworth

        Remember that ALL these type Data NASA is using has been modified/faked by the UN to support the notion that the earth is warming. Also, remember that the UN has already admitted that the ONE FINAL GOAL of the earth warming crap was to destroy Capitalism, in short, to destroy America.
        Even NASA believe the data for years. Also another fact they fail to take into consideration is that the climate goes through warming cycles and cooling cycles. There is plenty of data to support this but everyone in the earthwarming camp ignores it. We are right now in a COOLING cycle due to the stationary (forgot if it is a high or a low) staying off the west Canada coast and south of Alaska which pushes cold air into northern hemisphere and also does much the same for northern Europe.
        plenty of data on that too!

        • Grassroots

          I don’t deny that there have been other warning/cooling periods. It’s the accelerated pace of the changes that is attributed to human causes.

          As far as NASA, I don’t buy your claim that the UN modified or faked data and that NASA was so gullible and weak that it used that bad data. NASA has a reputation to uphold. Taking the cheater’s route would destroy the agency.

          • pineapple

            During the Medieval Warming Period, atmospheric temperatures were higher than they are now.

            During the Medieval Warming Period, Norse explorers were able to grow crops in areas of Greenland which are now covered with ice and snow.

            This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during which rivers in Europe froze over, causing crop failures and food shortages.

            This mini ice age was followed by the current warming period, which began around 1900.

            Global warming zealots blame the onset of the current warming period on the beginning of the industrial revolution, which also started around 1900, during which fossil fuels began to be used.

            The global warming zealots don’t bother to explain what caused the Medieval warming period, which occurred before the advent of fossil fuels.

          • Grassroots

            Of course there are warming and cooling trends throughout history. It’s the rapid pace of the current trend that speaks to human involvement. The real question is what can each and every one of us do to reverse the warming trend, if that’s even possible at this late date. We’re perilously close to raising the earth temp by 1.5 degrees, which is already adversely affecting sea levels and local weather (more and harsher storms, tornados, hurricanes, and the like).

          • pineapple

            Claim of consensus is fake’
            Plus: Science group ‘reviewing its stance on global warming’ after 160 physicists sign petition

            The following letter signed by five physicists was sent to all 100 U.S. Senator’s on October 29, 2009. The letter is reproduced in full below;

            A GAGGLE IS NOT A CONSENSUS
            You have recently received a letter from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), purporting to convey a “consensus” of the scientific community that immediate and drastic action is needed to avert a climatic catastrophe.
            We do not seek to make the scientific arguments here (we did that in “http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/11/02/team-of-scientists-open-letter-to-us-senators-claim-of-consensus-is-fake/a/1745/Scientists-Write-Open-Letter-to-Congress-You-Are-Being-Deceived-About-Global-Warming–Earth-has-been-cooling-for-ten-years” an earlier letter, sent a couple of months ago), but simply to note that the claim of consensus is fake, designed to stampede you into actions that will cripple our economy, and which you will regret for many years. There is no consensus, and even if there were, consensus is not the test of scientific validity. Theories that disagree with the facts are wrong, consensus or no.

            We know of no evidence that any of the “leaders” of the scientific community who signed the letter to you ever asked their memberships for their opinions, before claiming to represent them on this important matter.
            We also note that the American Physical Society (APS, and we are physicists) did not sign the letter, though the scientific issues at stake are fundamentally matters of applied physics. You can do physics without climatology, but you can’t do climatology without physics.
            The APS is at this moment reviewing its stance on so-called global warming, having received a Team of Scientists’ Open Letter To U.S. Senators: petition from its membership to do so. That petition was signed by 160 distinguished members and fellows of the Society, including one Nobelist and 12 members of the National Academies. Indeed a score of the signers are Members and Fellows of the AAAS, none of whom were consulted before the AAAS letter to you.
            Professor Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
            Professor Fred Singer, University of Virginia
            Professor Will Happer, Princeton University
            Professor Larry Gould, University of Hartford
            Dr. Roger Cohen, retired Manager, Strategic Planning, ExxonMobil
            List of 160 signers of the APS petition available at HYPERLINK “http://tinyurl.com/lg266u” http://tinyurl.com/lg266u
            Climate Depot’s Related Links:
            HYPERLINK “http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/11/02/team-of-scientists-open-letter-to-us-senators-claim-of-consensus-is-fake/a/1745/Scientists-Write-Open-Letter-to-Congress-You-Are-Being-Deceived-About-Global-Warming–Earth-has-been-cooling-for-ten-years” Scientists Write Open Letter to Congress: ‘You Are Being Deceived About Global Warming’ — ‘Earth has been cooling for ten years’ – July 1, 2009
            HYPERLINK “http://climatedepot.com/a/2213/Climate-Revolt-Worlds-Largest-Science-Group-Startled-By-Outpouring-of-Scientists-Rejecting-ManMade-Climate-Fears-Clamor-for-Editor-to-Be-Removed”

            Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed! – July 29, 2009
            HYPERLINK “http://www.examiner.com/x-7422-Cobb-County-Conservative-Examiner%7Ey2009m8d14-Prominent-scientists-push-to-revise-physics-society-climate-statement” American Physical Society to review its current climate statement after a group of 80 prominent physicists petitioned APS revise – May 1, 2009
            American Physical Society editor conceded a HYPERLINK “http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/no_consensus_and_no_warming_either” “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists – 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Polish-Academy-of-Sciences-Questions-Gores-Man-Made-Global-Warming-Theory-43618922.html” Polish National Academy of Science ‘published a document skeptical of man-made global warming’ – April 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03/02/global-warming-pause-print.html” Climate Fears RIP…for 30 years!? – Global Warming could stop ‘for up to 30 years! Warming ‘On Hold?…’Could go into hiding for decades,’ peer-reviewed study finds – Discovery.com – March 2, 2009
            March 2009 U. S. Senate Report: HYPERLINK “http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3” ‘More Than 700 International Scientists Dissenting Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims’
            HYPERLINK “http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Facts&ContentRecord_id=09DF614E-802A-23AD-46C9-8A90FCB5569A” India Issued a report challenging global warming fears – 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=865DBE39-802A-23AD-4949-EE9098538277” Canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is “settled” – 2008
            Japan Geoscience Union symposium 2008 survey HYPERLINK “http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25182520-2703,00.html” ‘showed 90 per cent of the participants do not believe the IPCC report’
            HYPERLINK “http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2008/08/report-from-33d-intl.html” Skeptical scientists overwhelm Prestigious Geologist conference in Norway in 2008: ’2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC’ & see full reports HYPERLINK “http://www.rightsidenews.com/200808191759/energy-and-environment/global-warming-skeptics-prominently-featured-at-international-scientific-meeting.html” here & HYPERLINK “http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2008/08/another-prominent-scientist-dissents.html” here
            HYPERLINK “http://www.oism.org/pproject/” Petition signed by over 31,000 American scientists: ‘There is no convincing scientific evidence that greenhouse gasses are causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating’ – 2009

          • Grassroots

            You seem to be a victim of fake experts, cherry picking of facts, jumping to conclusions, and a colloquial view of the planet.

          • pineapple

            What Actual Science Says About CO2 & Climate Change
            Over the last couple of decades the public has been inundated and,
            indeed, indoctrinated to believe that a relatively trace concentration
            of naturally-produced Carbon Dioxide (CO2) aided by an extremely-trace concentration of CO2 produced by Man’s use of fossil fuels and industrial processes has now in the 20th and 21st centuries suddenly become the Primary Driver (Forcing Agent) of Climate Change due to the well-known Greenhouse Effect.

            This incredible claim by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is not
            only stunning in its audacity, but the climate driven by our Sun for the
            previous 4.5 Billion years with much higher and lower levels of Carbon
            Dioxide (CO2) concentrations never had much effect on
            temperature or climate; Plus, there has never been any runaway global
            warming – Our Climate Temperature have always cycled between warmer and
            cooler periods and will continue to do so for the next 3-4 Billion
            years.

            GWA Pseudo-Science vs. Actual Science

            The following graph appears in numerous articles, lectures and
            textbooks in support, and it is even asserted as proof, of the Man-Made
            Global Warming / Climate Change Hypothesis — However, it is merely a
            clever trick based on a logical ‘Fallacy of Presumption’ that you will falsely presume, what the years of propaganda have conditioned you to believe, that Man-Made CO2 is the Cause for increased warming of the Earth.

            So what is actually CAUSING the rising temperatures?

            The implied presumption in the above graph is that: The increasing CO2-Concentration Line produced by Man’s fossil-fuel emissions are Causing
            the increasingly warming color-coded temperatures because of the
            implied increased warming due to the Earth’s Greenhouse Gas Effect.

            Although this is the GWA claim, the actual Science refutes this claim:

            Accurate Satellite Measurements of Temperature in our
            atmosphere, including those near the top of our Troposphere at 10 km
            altitude where the Greenhouse Effect occurs show no unusual warming, only natural variation.
            What this graph does not show (i.e., Deliberately
            Hides), is that prior to 1880, we were in the very cold “Little Ice Age”
            (1300 – 1850 AD) so of course it was time for the temperatures to
            increase dramatically during the Modern Grand Solar Maximum (1880 – 2016
            where warming peaked in 1998 & suddenly dropped 1.08 oF and since then, the warming trend has remained flat for the last 18.5 years).
            The temperature has been both high and low when CO2 Concentrations have been both high and low – Indicating that CO2 is not a primary driver nor even a major influencer of climate change. (i.e., During the big ice ages, CO2 levels have been 10-15 times the concentrations of today’s CO2 at 400 ppm x 10 = 4,000+ ppm while the climate was extremely cold).
            Increasing Temperatures produced by the sun’s energy
            evaporate water and carbolic acid from the oceans producing atmospheric
            Greenhouse Gases in these ratios: 95% Water Vapor (H2O) and 4% Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) of GHGs. Al Gore got it wrong, Temperature à CO2 , not CO2 à

            Our Star, the Sun, is the primary source of energy:
            Full-spectrum Electromagnetic Energy which includes visible light, UV,
            Infrared (IR), X-ray radiation, etc. which provides illumination and
            energy

            Although the GWA claim that the Sun’s energy output is a
            constant and that since the beginning of the Industrial Age (i.e.,
            1880) climate change is solely driven by man-made CO2

            200 years ago, Lord Kelvin erroneously believed
            that the Sun’s TSI (Total Solar Illumination) was a constant, but soon
            after his death scientists Maunder and his wife proved this was not
            true. Since that time, much has been learned about the 11-year Schwabe
            solar cycles between high and low solar energy output which is very
            reliably indicated by Sunspot Counts (High counts when very active with
            high energy output and Low counts when the Sun’s is said to be cold with
            lower energy output).
            The Sun’s TSI is quite variable in alternating solar
            cycles between warmer (high-energy output) and colder (low-energy
            output) climate changes.

            In addition, certain portions of the TSI energy spectrum reaching Earth’s atmosphere can be amplified,
            blocked and saturated limiting additional warming in different ways.
            For example the Infrared (IR) range of light is responsible for most of
            the Greenhouse Effect, but as different Greenhouse Gases (i.e., CO2 & Water Vapor (H2O)
            ) approach their respective saturation point, further doubling of the
            quantity produces a pronounced lesser effect until saturated – When no
            amount of doubling of CO2 or water vapor will produce significantly more warming via the Greenhouse Effect.
            This observed logarithmic-saturation effect contravenes the GWA claim of unlimited Runaway Greenhouse Warming due to CO2 — The Greenhouse Effect is Natural and Self-Balancing; Maintaining a balanced pleasant and habitable climate on Earth.
            Many other very-complex factors have effects on our
            long-term Climate due to a combination of cycles of a few years to tens,
            thousands to 100-thousands of years which share in the variability of
            our climate and our seasons – All of these significant influences are
            natural such as our vast oceans and decadal oscillations as well as many
            which are Extraterrestrial — All are beyond man’s control!

            As shown above, this general pattern of ongoing solar cycles over 4.5
            Billion years continually alternating between warm and cold climate
            periods correlates with Sunspot Counts that are consistent with
            the variable energy changes in the output of the Sun which have always
            and will continue to be the Primary Driver & Cause of climate on
            Earth today and in the future.

            When Sunspot Counts are Low, our climate is Cooler and when they are High, our climate is Warmer.
            This dynamic is caused by changes in the Sun’s own magnetic field and
            its impact on earth that is affected by the strength of the Earth’s own
            magnetic field and a number of other complex factors such as cosmic rays
            & the Earth’s orbit and tilt.

            Taking a closer look at Solar Cycles

            The following diagram shows a generalized view of the ongoing solar
            cycles alternating between warm and cold climate periods over the last
            roughly 1,000 years (900 AD – 2016) and the expected trend for the next
            20-30 years where we should experience a much colder global climate
            during the coming Modern Solar Minimum.

            An “Inconvenient Coincidence”’ allowed Al Gore and
            the GWA to Claim: The Primary Driver of Climate Change is No Longer the
            Sun and its Solar Cycles, but now it is Man-Made CO2 from the
            use of fossil fuels. However, Al Gore, UN IPCC & the GWA prefer not
            to mention the Sun and they deny the Sun’s energy output is variable
            and significant. The UN IPCC even tried to hide the existence of the
            very similar and warmer ‘Medieval Grand Solar Maximum warm
            period’ of a thousand years ago from the public — Since it conflicts
            with their hypothesis and it is clear evidence that Solar and other
            cycles are the primary drivers of climate change and that they alternate
            between warm and cold minimums – Not Runaway Global Warming due to greenhouse gases as the GWA claim!

            Controversy Simply Explained & Resolved
            About 2000 years ago, there was a Roman Warm Period and then
            it got cold. About 1000 years ago, there was a Medieval Warm Period
            and then it got cold. That was the Little Ice Age. When Oceans are warm,
            Polar Oceans thaw, snowfall increases and rebuilds ice on Greenland,
            Antarctic and Mountain Glaciers. Ice builds, spreads and makes earth
            cold again. Snowfall decreases and the Sun removes ice every year until
            it gets warm again.

            It is warm again now because it is supposed to be warm now. It is a natural cycle and we did not cause it. CO2 just makes green things grow better, while using less water.

            The alarmists scare us so they can tax and control us.

            Former NASA Scientists and Climate Experts, Thomas Wysmuller &
            Alex Pope, had a brief and effective explanation for the subject of the
            Earth’s Climate Change which fits nicely on the back of a standard-sized
            business card:

            Isn’t it amazing how very simple the answer to the Man-Made Climate Change

            ‘Contrived Controversy’ actually is!

            Climate Change is Primarily Natural Then, Now and in the Future!

            Puny Man and His Impact on Climate is well-within the Range of Natural Variation

            THAT’S IT – CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL!

            Man and his use of Fossil Fuels actually have an Insignificant Impact upon the Earth’s Climate due to CO2
            and the well-known Greenhouse Effect (GE) which is actually activated
            by light in the Infrared (IR) spectrum of the sun’s light which also is
            very limited by natural saturation constraints on the Greenhouse-Effect
            (GE) that maintains a balance in GE-warming keeping it well-within the
            range of Natural Variation! Hence, any unending and run-away GE-warming
            as falsely predicted by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is precluded.

            To the many that have heard all of the Globalist, Progressives,
            Environmentalist and UN IPCC extensive propaganda over the last couple
            of decades who have Grossly Exaggerated a small true fact about Carbon
            Dioxide into their Only Tenuous Link between Climate Change and Man – This statement that: ‘Man & Fossil Fuels have little impact on our climate’ may sound Preposterous, but it is Scientifically True.

            Both the Sun’s and the Earth’s magnetic fields are quite low now –
            Many solar scientists analyzing the current solar patterns compared with
            the past believe that the coming Modern Solar Minimum transition that
            began around 2010 is about to take us to a very much colder climate. We
            have already seen Northern Hemisphere records for winter ice and snow
            broken at the 100-year level and soon possibly 200-year and even
            400-year records-breaks are possible which are similar to the severe
            cold of the Dalton and extremely cold Maunder Solar Minimums during the
            ‘Little Ice Age’ (1300 – 1850 AD). As global temperatures continue to
            cool, don’t be surprised if the GWA begins to spin: “Global Warming
            & CO2 Causes Global Cooling!” – Don’t believe it!

            Don’t just take my word for this, use this link to view an excellent
            factual and scientifically-based video by the actual Climate & Solar
            Scientists that analyzed the Ice-Core Samples, Oceanic and Polar Ice
            Patterns as well as received NASA awards of Excellence for their work on
            Satellite Global Temperature monitoring, etc.

            CLICK ON THIS LINK: https://youtu.be/52Mx0_8YEtg to view this factual movie that explains the true science and politics behind the Man-Made Climate Change Controversy.

          • pineapple

            What Actual Science Says About CO2 & Climate Change
            Over the last couple of decades the public has been inundated and,
            indeed, indoctrinated to believe that a relatively trace concentration
            of naturally-produced Carbon Dioxide (CO2) aided by an extremely-trace concentration of CO2 produced by Man’s use of fossil fuels and industrial processes has now in the 20th and 21st centuries suddenly become the Primary Driver (Forcing Agent) of Climate Change due to the well-known Greenhouse Effect.

            This incredible claim by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is not
            only stunning in its audacity, but the climate driven by our Sun for the
            previous 4.5 Billion years with much higher and lower levels of Carbon
            Dioxide (CO2) concentrations never had much effect on
            temperature or climate; Plus, there has never been any runaway global
            warming – Our Climate Temperature have always cycled between warmer and
            cooler periods and will continue to do so for the next 3-4 Billion
            years.

            GWA Pseudo-Science vs. Actual Science

            The following graph appears in numerous articles, lectures and
            textbooks in support, and it is even asserted as proof, of the Man-Made
            Global Warming / Climate Change Hypothesis — However, it is merely a
            clever trick based on a logical ‘Fallacy of Presumption’ that you will falsely presume, what the years of propaganda have conditioned you to believe, that Man-Made CO2 is the Cause for increased warming of the Earth.

            So what is actually CAUSING the rising temperatures?

            The implied presumption in the above graph is that: The increasing CO2-Concentration Line produced by Man’s fossil-fuel emissions are Causing
            the increasingly warming color-coded temperatures because of the
            implied increased warming due to the Earth’s Greenhouse Gas Effect.

            Although this is the GWA claim, the actual Science refutes this claim:

            Accurate Satellite Measurements of Temperature in our
            atmosphere, including those near the top of our Troposphere at 10 km
            altitude where the Greenhouse Effect occurs show no unusual warming, only natural variation.
            What this graph does not show (i.e., Deliberately
            Hides), is that prior to 1880, we were in the very cold “Little Ice Age”
            (1300 – 1850 AD) so of course it was time for the temperatures to
            increase dramatically during the Modern Grand Solar Maximum (1880 – 2016
            where warming peaked in 1998 & suddenly dropped 1.08 oF and since then, the warming trend has remained flat for the last 18.5 years).
            The temperature has been both high and low when CO2 Concentrations have been both high and low – Indicating that CO2 is not a primary driver nor even a major influencer of climate change. (i.e., During the big ice ages, CO2 levels have been 10-15 times the concentrations of today’s CO2 at 400 ppm x 10 = 4,000+ ppm while the climate was extremely cold).
            Increasing Temperatures produced by the sun’s energy
            evaporate water and carbolic acid from the oceans producing atmospheric
            Greenhouse Gases in these ratios: 95% Water Vapor (H2O) and 4% Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) of GHGs. Al Gore got it wrong, Temperature à CO2 , not CO2 à

            Our Star, the Sun, is the primary source of energy:
            Full-spectrum Electromagnetic Energy which includes visible light, UV,
            Infrared (IR), X-ray radiation, etc. which provides illumination and
            energy

            Although the GWA claim that the Sun’s energy output is a
            constant and that since the beginning of the Industrial Age (i.e.,
            1880) climate change is solely driven by man-made CO2

            200 years ago, Lord Kelvin erroneously believed
            that the Sun’s TSI (Total Solar Illumination) was a constant, but soon
            after his death scientists Maunder and his wife proved this was not
            true. Since that time, much has been learned about the 11-year Schwabe
            solar cycles between high and low solar energy output which is very
            reliably indicated by Sunspot Counts (High counts when very active with
            high energy output and Low counts when the Sun’s is said to be cold with
            lower energy output).
            The Sun’s TSI is quite variable in alternating solar
            cycles between warmer (high-energy output) and colder (low-energy
            output) climate changes.

            In addition, certain portions of the TSI energy spectrum reaching Earth’s atmosphere can be amplified,
            blocked and saturated limiting additional warming in different ways.
            For example the Infrared (IR) range of light is responsible for most of
            the Greenhouse Effect, but as different Greenhouse Gases (i.e., CO2 & Water Vapor (H2O)
            ) approach their respective saturation point, further doubling of the
            quantity produces a pronounced lesser effect until saturated – When no
            amount of doubling of CO2 or water vapor will produce significantly more warming via the Greenhouse Effect.
            This observed logarithmic-saturation effect contravenes the GWA claim of unlimited Runaway Greenhouse Warming due to CO2 — The Greenhouse Effect is Natural and Self-Balancing; Maintaining a balanced pleasant and habitable climate on Earth.
            Many other very-complex factors have effects on our
            long-term Climate due to a combination of cycles of a few years to tens,
            thousands to 100-thousands of years which share in the variability of
            our climate and our seasons – All of these significant influences are
            natural such as our vast oceans and decadal oscillations as well as many
            which are Extraterrestrial — All are beyond man’s control!

            As shown above, this general pattern of ongoing solar cycles over 4.5
            Billion years continually alternating between warm and cold climate
            periods correlates with Sunspot Counts that are consistent with
            the variable energy changes in the output of the Sun which have always
            and will continue to be the Primary Driver & Cause of climate on
            Earth today and in the future.

            When Sunspot Counts are Low, our climate is Cooler and when they are High, our climate is Warmer.
            This dynamic is caused by changes in the Sun’s own magnetic field and
            its impact on earth that is affected by the strength of the Earth’s own
            magnetic field and a number of other complex factors such as cosmic rays
            & the Earth’s orbit and tilt.

            Taking a closer look at Solar Cycles

            The following diagram shows a generalized view of the ongoing solar
            cycles alternating between warm and cold climate periods over the last
            roughly 1,000 years (900 AD – 2016) and the expected trend for the next
            20-30 years where we should experience a much colder global climate
            during the coming Modern Solar Minimum.

            An “Inconvenient Coincidence”’ allowed Al Gore and
            the GWA to Claim: The Primary Driver of Climate Change is No Longer the
            Sun and its Solar Cycles, but now it is Man-Made CO2 from the
            use of fossil fuels. However, Al Gore, UN IPCC & the GWA prefer not
            to mention the Sun and they deny the Sun’s energy output is variable
            and significant. The UN IPCC even tried to hide the existence of the
            very similar and warmer ‘Medieval Grand Solar Maximum warm
            period’ of a thousand years ago from the public — Since it conflicts
            with their hypothesis and it is clear evidence that Solar and other
            cycles are the primary drivers of climate change and that they alternate
            between warm and cold minimums – Not Runaway Global Warming due to greenhouse gases as the GWA claim!

            Controversy Simply Explained & Resolved
            About 2000 years ago, there was a Roman Warm Period and then
            it got cold. About 1000 years ago, there was a Medieval Warm Period
            and then it got cold. That was the Little Ice Age. When Oceans are warm,
            Polar Oceans thaw, snowfall increases and rebuilds ice on Greenland,
            Antarctic and Mountain Glaciers. Ice builds, spreads and makes earth
            cold again. Snowfall decreases and the Sun removes ice every year until
            it gets warm again.

            It is warm again now because it is supposed to be warm now. It is a natural cycle and we did not cause it. CO2 just makes green things grow better, while using less water.

            The alarmists scare us so they can tax and control us.

            Former NASA Scientists and Climate Experts, Thomas Wysmuller &
            Alex Pope, had a brief and effective explanation for the subject of the
            Earth’s Climate Change which fits nicely on the back of a standard-sized
            business card:

            Isn’t it amazing how very simple the answer to the Man-Made Climate Change

            ‘Contrived Controversy’ actually is!

            Climate Change is Primarily Natural Then, Now and in the Future!

            Puny Man and His Impact on Climate is well-within the Range of Natural Variation

            THAT’S IT – CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL!

            Man and his use of Fossil Fuels actually have an Insignificant Impact upon the Earth’s Climate due to CO2
            and the well-known Greenhouse Effect (GE) which is actually activated
            by light in the Infrared (IR) spectrum of the sun’s light which also is
            very limited by natural saturation constraints on the Greenhouse-Effect
            (GE) that maintains a balance in GE-warming keeping it well-within the
            range of Natural Variation! Hence, any unending and run-away GE-warming
            as falsely predicted by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is precluded.

            To the many that have heard all of the Globalist, Progressives,
            Environmentalist and UN IPCC extensive propaganda over the last couple
            of decades who have Grossly Exaggerated a small true fact about Carbon
            Dioxide into their Only Tenuous Link between Climate Change and Man – This statement that: ‘Man & Fossil Fuels have little impact on our climate’ may sound Preposterous, but it is Scientifically True.

            Both the Sun’s and the Earth’s magnetic fields are quite low now –
            Many solar scientists analyzing the current solar patterns compared with
            the past believe that the coming Modern Solar Minimum transition that
            began around 2010 is about to take us to a very much colder climate. We
            have already seen Northern Hemisphere records for winter ice and snow
            broken at the 100-year level and soon possibly 200-year and even
            400-year records-breaks are possible which are similar to the severe
            cold of the Dalton and extremely cold Maunder Solar Minimums during the
            ‘Little Ice Age’ (1300 – 1850 AD). As global temperatures continue to
            cool, don’t be surprised if the GWA begins to spin: “Global Warming
            & CO2 Causes Global Cooling!” – Don’t believe it!

            Don’t just take my word for this, use this link to view an excellent
            factual and scientifically-based video by the actual Climate & Solar
            Scientists that analyzed the Ice-Core Samples, Oceanic and Polar Ice
            Patterns as well as received NASA awards of Excellence for their work on
            Satellite Global Temperature monitoring, etc.

            CLICK ON THIS LINK: https://youtu.be/52Mx0_8YEtg to view this factual movie that explains the true science and politics behind the Man-Made Climate Change Controversy.

          • Grassroots
          • pineapple

            President Obama Has His
            Hand in the Cookie Jar Too.

            After accepting $1.25 million in campaign contributions, President Obama made sure to include his “global warming” plans in his victory speech: “We want our children to live in an America that isn’t threatened by the destructive power of a warming planet.”
            You are likely familiar with the story of the failed Solyndra green energy initiative, which cost taxpayers $500 million; President Obama took a lot of flak for that.
            But here’s a little-known side of the Solyndra story I bet you haven’t heard: Obama, in essence, used taxpayer money to finance his re-election campaign . . . by funneling it through Solyndra.
            You see, when Solyndra fell on hard times, it passed into the hands of two large private equity investors . . . Goldman Sachs and George Kaiser. When $500 million in taxpayer money was given to Solyndra, both Goldman Sachs and George Kaiser benefited. Coincidentally, both have made contributions to Obama’s election campaigns adding up to roughly $1.25 million.
            It doesn’t stop there.
            In 2010, another federal loan of $400 million went Abound Solar. That resulted in a bankruptcy as well. But investors in Abound Solar seemed to do just fine . . . investors like billionaire heiress Patricia Stryker. Stryker has famously contributed $500,000 to the Coalition for Progress while throwing $85,000 toward Obama’s inaugural committee. It’s just a coincidence that the government handed a company she invested in $400 million just before bankruptcy . . . right?
            There’s also A123 Systems, which paid one lobbying firm $970,000 to secure money from the government — and received $279 million in federal assistance. The CEO of A123 Systems went on to fund multiple Democratic senators and contributed to Obama’s campaign.
            First Solar received $646 million in government loan guarantees, and has since contributed more than $180,000 to Democratic campaigns.
            GE is notorious for spending tens of millions of dollars a year to “buy” green energy credits for its wind turbines and other green technologies — credits which helped the firm pay ZERO taxes in 2011.
            There are a host of other examples of liberals getting wealthy off “global warming” initiatives just like these.
            You can see why green energy is such a profitable business — CEOs and executives get to rake in millions of dollars, while politicians get lucrative donations for their campaigns . . . and scientists get all the funding they need to keep them going . . . all on your dime.

          • Grassroots

            If we all work together, we can reduce our deleterious impact on the earth. Sweden recycles all but 1% of its waste and garbage now and converts it into energy for the country. In fact, they’re doing such a good job that they’re running out of waste in their own country and are soliciting it from other countries.

            There’s lots of jobs being created in the alternative energy field. We won’t need dirty coal anymore once we’ve built up a vast alternative energy system. Coal is going away for good, and good riddance.

            Clean energy will go a long way toward reducing our carbon footprint on the planet. Of course, the excess CO2 already in the atmosphere is going to take a long time to diminish. But there’s great hope that we will eventually be able to slow down global warming. It’s too late to go backwards. The best we can do, if we all work together, is to reduce and stabilize temperatures.

            I tell you, this university course I’m taking is teaching me so much about how climate and weather works. By drilling deep into the ice at the poles and extracting ice core samples, climate conditions thousands of years ago can be determined. Fascinating stuff.

            The United States is falling far behind many of the other developed countries of the world in fighting back against human-created global warming. For the sake of our children and our children’s children, I pray that we get on the bandwagon and work together to protect our environment. Future lives are at stake.

          • pineapple

            A new study produced by a University of
            Wisconsin-Madison geoscientist and Northwestern astrophysicist presents
            an explanation of the fluctuations of the earth’s temperatures in the
            past that highlights the complexity of the forces at work on the earth’s
            climate and how much we still have to learn about them. The study
            maintains that the cycle of changes in the climate over the millennia is
            largely a result of changes in the amount of solar radiation, in part
            caused by small changes in the orbits of Earth and Mars.

            While
            the notion that the impact on earth’s orbital cycle on solar radiation
            levels is a significant factor determining global temperatures is
            anything but new, the team of scientists seem to have tied the
            phenomenon to planetary orbits in a more concrete manner than previous
            studies.

            In an article summarizing
            the scientists’ findings, the University of Wisconsin-Madison notes
            that the study “provides the first hard proof for what scientists call
            the ‘chaotic solar system,’ a theory proposed in 1989 to account for
            small variations in the present conditions of the solar system.”
            Those variations over millions of years “produce big changes in our
            planet’s climate.” Not only does the new discovery promise to provide
            a better understanding of “the mechanics of the solar system,” but also
            “a better understanding of the link between orbital variations and
            climate change over geologic time scales.”

            UW-M provides some more details on the groundbreaking study:

            Using evidence from alternating layers of limestone and shale laid
            down over millions of years in a shallow North American seaway at the
            time dinosaurs held sway on Earth, the team led by UW–Madison Professor
            of Geoscience Stephen Meyers and Northwestern University Professor of
            Earth and Planetary Sciences Brad Sageman discovered the 87
            million-year-old signature of a “resonance transition” between Mars and
            Earth. A resonance transition is the consequence of the “butterfly
            effect” in chaos theory. It plays on the idea that small changes in the
            initial conditions of a nonlinear system can have large effects over
            time.

            In the context of the solar system, the phenomenon occurs when two
            orbiting bodies periodically tug at one another, as occurs when a planet
            in its track around the sun passes in relative proximity to another
            planet in its own orbit. These small but regular ticks in a planet’s
            orbit can exert big changes on the location and orientation of a planet
            on its axis relative to the sun and, accordingly, change the amount of
            solar radiation a planet receives over a given area. Where and how much
            solar radiation a planet gets is a key driver of climate.

            Over the ages, the subtle variations in the
            orbits of Earth and Mars, the scientists theorize, have impacted the
            amount of Earth’s exposure to solar radiation and thus led to shifts in
            global temperatures, impacting the pattern of Earth’s ice ages.

            “The impact of astronomical cycles on
            climate can be quite large,” explains Meyers, noting as an example the
            pacing of the Earth’s ice ages, which have been reliably matched to
            periodic changes in the shape of Earth’s orbit, and the tilt of our
            planet on its axis.

            While evidence that the earth’s orbital
            variations impact radiation levels and thus global temperatures does not
            of course mean that man is not in some way impacting the climate,
            studies like these inadvertently highlight that there are complex
            natural phenomena impacting the planet that are utterly out of our
            control and about which we still have much to learn.

            Read Wisconsin-Madison’s full report here.

    • pineapple

      “Oh, I’m just an 86 year old spring chicken.”

      I am a 77 year old “spring chicken” who agrees with you.

      In a way, we are lucky because we won’t have to witness the demise of our country. In another way, we are unlucky because our descendants will have to deal with the demise.

      Peace to you!

      • Mynickelsworth

        I have you beat on that score – I have no descendents to worry about.
        I also don’t expect to be here to see the demise either. I’m expecting Jesus to come before that happens and before I die. We are very near the end and one day suddenly the world will go for a world ruler, an Islamic that will rule for 7 years while
        all kinds of bad things happen, earthquakes, big meteors hitting earth, plagues, etc killing at least 1/3 and may 1/2 the population.

        • pineapple

          “I also don’t expect to be here to see the demise either.”

          You are already seeing the demise.

          Obama by the Numbers: Is America Better Off Now than When Obama took Office?

          Compared with the situation eight years ago before President
          Obama took office, America is much worse off now in any number of ways.
          Here is a brief enumeration of several of them:

          The Economy

          For many people, the economic numbers for the U.S. tell most of the
          story of the Obama administration: the national debt increased while
          wages fell and the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) tanked.

          Indeed, Obama nearly doubled the national debt from $10.6 trillion in
          2009 to $20 trillion as of the end of 2016. So, in essence, Obama was
          responsible for almost half the entire national debt while effectively
          doubling it in dollar terms. In fact, he increased the national debt
          more than all previous U.S. presidents combined.

          Partially as a result, Standard & Poor’s downgraded the U.S.’s
          credit rating, and there were multiple debt ceiling crises in Congress,
          including a two-week shutdown of the government in 2013.

          At the same time, the U.S. economy as a whole grew at a dismal
          average of 2.1 percent during Obama’s tenure, and the highest growth
          Obama could boast during his two terms as president was 2.6 percent in
          2015.

          Obama didn’t have a single year where the economy grew by at least
          three percent, whereas from 1790 to 2000, U.S. GDP grew an average of
          3.79 percent per year. The longest previous similar downturn only lasted
          four years, and that was in the Great Depression. These figures are
          dreadful for a modern administration and represent the fourth-worst GDP
          numbers for any president in U.S. history so far.

          And finally, American median household income still has not recovered
          to pre-2008 levels of approximately $57,500, adjusted for inflation.
          This means that the multi-decade trend of most Americans’ incomes
          stagnating or falling has simply continued.

          The above numbers, along with the amount of deaths from foreign
          conflicts (see below), are one of the Obama presidency’s worst legacies.

          Trade

          In some senses, U.S. citizens dodged a bullet on trade. Obama was
          trying his darndest to pass the Transpacific Partnership (TPP), the
          Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the Trade in
          Services Agreement (TISA) and other free-trade agreements before his
          term was up. In the time since Bill Clinton was president and signed the
          North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), nearly one-third of all
          American manufacturing jobs have disappeared.

          If any of the above deals went through, even more jobs would have
          left the country, and a few select billionaires would have gotten richer
          while more Americans would be out of work. In addition, U.S. citizens
          would be forced to accept lower quality standards for food, drugs and
          consumer goods imported from other countries.

          Obama got as far as passing fast-track authority for TPP in Congress,
          but wasn’t able to corral the votes for getting the actual agreement
          itself passed after Trump won the election. Thank goodness; Trump
          announced that the TPP would be killed on his first day in office.

          Jobs

          After the financial crisis of 2008, the economy tanked and millions
          of Americans lost their jobs. According to Obama’s own first Secretary
          of Labor, as many as one in three American men (out of approximately 96
          million people total not participating in the workforce) is still out of
          work due to the greatly diminished recovery that Obama’s administration
          has tried to portray as fully fledged.

          In fact, Obama’s nearly endless trumpeting of rosy job numbers in the
          last four years of his presidency (when official unemployment fell from
          8 percent to under 5 percent) was based on fudged numbers given by the
          Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). When one looks at official data and
          charts, there are asterisks next to the most recent years due to changes
          in the way the BLS calculates its figures.

          Another issue is that even if people have gotten jobs, as many as 94
          percent of them are from part-time work in what many euphemistically
          call “the gig economy” (read: low-paying service-sector jobs). If one
          becomes a waiter when one used to be a union card-carrying factory
          worker, almost surely a pay cut is involved.

          Immigration

          One of the reasons why job numbers and wages were so bad was because
          of illegal immigration during Obama’s two terms. Throughout Obama’s time
          in office, the number of illegal immigrants in the country remained
          roughly 11 million, or 3.5 percent of the country’s population.

          But the number of illegals in the nation’s workforce is roughly 8
          million, or 5 percent of those working or looking for work; the laws
          regarding employers hiring these people are not strict enough. Even with
          legal immigration, quotas on foreign-born H1-B visa laborers (currently
          at 85,000 per year) allow many transplants from other countries to grab
          high-tech jobs that could otherwise go to American workers.

          In the very worst cases, employers such as Disney and Toys R Us laid
          off Americans who had to train their less-well-paid foreign-born
          replacements. And to make matters worse, before the presidential
          election, both Hillary Clinton and Obama were promising to boost H1-B
          visa numbers even higher, which would have resulted in yet more job
          losses. This was likely due to billionaires such as Mark Zuckerberg and
          Larry Page donating millions of dollars to Democratic campaigns, such as
          the one for Hillary Clinton.

          Not only were immigrants a threat on the job front, they were and
          still are a threat on the security front. High-profile shootings in San
          Bernardino, California; Orlando, Florida and elsewhere left dozens of
          Americans dead from Islamic radicals who were followers of ISIS. Despite
          the obvious danger, Obama and Clinton wanted to vastly increase the
          number of Middle Eastern and other dangerous refugees into a system that
          has extremely poor vetting.

          Foreign Conflicts

          Why were all these immigrants leaving these Middle Eastern countries?
          It could very well be because the United States was bombing them. At
          least in the case of Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Afghanistan and
          Pakistan, this was the case. In Syria alone, U.S. support for the
          “moderate rebel” opposition helped result in more than 400,000 civilian
          deaths, while tens of thousands more innocent people along with U.S.
          troops died in at least six other countries while Obama was in office.
          U.S. Special Forces are currently deployed in 134 countries globally, a
          123 percent increase under Obama.

          Of course, the Obama administration claims we were on the right side
          in all these conflicts, but foreign policy has not been Obama’s strong
          suit. Many analysts attribute the formation of ISIS to Obama’s pulling
          out of Iraq too early. Obama also released and transferred hundreds of
          prisoners from the U.S. facilities at Guantanamo Bay. At least a few of
          these prisoners have rejoined jihad movements to once again threaten the
          lives of U.S. soldiers.

          Race Relations

          Obama loves to talk about race and how the country needs to improve
          race relations. But under Obama’s policies and encouragement of social
          justice protesting by groups like Black Lives Matter, this improvement
          is not happening. Actually, in most cases, it’s just making matters
          worse.

          In fact, it’s arguable that race relations now are rougher than
          they’ve been at any point in the last 20 to 30 years, as high-profile
          police brutality and murder cases have been covered seemingly nonstop by
          the media. From the death of Trayvon Martin in 2012 to the deaths of
          Eric Garner and Michael Brown in 2014 to the death in custody of Sandra
          Bland in 2015, protests and anti-police violence have claimed the lives
          of brave police officers.

          With each case, Obama has reminded Americans of how deep the divide
          is rather than attempting to heal the fissures that exist. He also has
          sought to undermine people’s faith in local police forces and said that
          protesting police action is a positive step. This ties in with:

          Crime and Murder Rates

          Something not spoken about much regarding the Obama administration is
          how much crime — especially the murder rate — has gone up during this
          time. The murder rate in the 25 largest cities across the nation went up
          by 11 percent from 2015 to 2016 and is set to rise again for 2016.

          In Obama’s hometown of Chicago, the data is even worse. For 2016, the
          homicide rate was 715 deaths, with 4379 people shot last year, an
          increase of 59 percent from 2015 when 2996 people were shot and 447
          died. Whether one can point the finger at the outgoing president
          specifically for this surge is admittedly debatable, but certainly, the
          dreadful economy played a part in this new crime trend, which Obama has
          grudgingly agreed with, mentioning “pockets of poverty that are highly
          segregated” in a recent interview.

          • Mynickelsworth

            Great writeup! Better than the news media has handled it.

      • Mynickelsworth

        Sorry but i have you beaten on that score – I have no descendents to be involved in the demise.

  • dogtrainer1

    So the American Taxpayer is asked to spend 1/2 BILLION DOLLARS to repair an earthly condition, which is questionable, at best. Then the Nations (China and India) who are the World’s Worst Polluters, not only Continue to Pollute, but are also given funds, to Not Pollute. That is some messed up BS!

    • Grassroots

      Unfortunately, two wrongs don’t make a right. China and India may continue to pollute, but that is totally irrelevant to the fact that each of us must work even harder to protect the earth.

  • Dan

    If you can believe what is stated by some scientists in both research and through the media the amount of pollutants that the United States is responsible for is about 2% of the world’s carbon based pollutants. The country that should be concerned about is China who is supposedly responsible for close to 60% of the carbon based pollutants. Al other countries comprise the remainder. If anyone else has heard differently from a trusted source that does not have a financial interest it would be nice to report. It’s amazing that Gore invested a great deal of money in “green” companies before he jumped on this bandwagon and actors like L. De Caprio flies around the world in his private jet to complain about our abuse of carbon based fuel.

    • Grassroots

      The question must be asked, what can the individual citizen do to become a good steward of the earth and cut back or eliminate ozone destructive emissions. We can’t blame China. We can blame ourselves and take constructive action. If each and every person and company/corporation became a trusted steward of the earth, we could substantially lower our destructive impact.

      Now, about all those scientists who agree that climate change is caused by humans? Check out this link to a NASA webpage. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

    • pineapple

      Gore said oceans would rise twenty feet, and then bought a house on the coast.
      DUH!

  • Mathew Molk

    But what are the cupcakes with the butter tub jobs going to do now? Looks like we will have a few more on welfare and medicaid. Maybe they can get jobs at universities telling their lies there. I’m sure the NWO Marxists still love them. — Hey, how ’bout applying with the UN now that we don’t need them here anymore

    Poor snowflakes,,,My heart pumps pee for them.

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      oh sure, pump a thawing agent on them……

    • Grassroots

      Your anatomy must be really screwed up if your heart is pumping pee.

  • R. T.

    Back in junior high science climate is controlled by orbit and sometimes sunspots , in History we learned of hot and down right cold times !

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      Climate change in a nutshell.

      Warm tropical air blows across the Oceans of the world, and as they go, they pull water, in the form of condensation, that cools the air and rises to form clouds.

      Those clouds provide shade for the waters which help cool those warm tropical breezes before they hit land.
      The clouds, and the cooler breezes cool the earth.

      The clouds gather and the moisture begins to collect into droplets, gathering more moisture as the drops begin to fall.
      As the rain falls though the warmer air beneath the clouds, evaporation occurs cools the lower air, which helps cool the earth.
      The rain hits the earth, some soaks in, some runs off directly into the streams, ponds, lakes and rivers and begins the journey back to the Oceans.

      The rain that soaked in waters the vegetation between rain storms, the vegetation shades the earth and keeps it cool.

      The cycle repeats every day someplace on the Planet, always in more than one place.

      Been that way for a few billion years and nothing has changed the cycle.

      Any questions?

      Incidentally, the ‘consensus’ crowd refuse to refer to this in their efforts to convince the poorly educated.

      • Grassroots

        Your words prove only that you are a stellar member in good standing of the poorly educated group, Old Crusty. What is it about rapid modern climate change that most eludes you?

        • CrustyOldGeezer

          Probably has a lot to do with ABSOLUTELY no Scientific Evidence that can be proven either through normal, everyday observation, or testing of the ‘scientific theory’ in a laboratory under controlled conditions where falsified data IS NOT allowed.

          That help you out little buddy?

          • Grassroots

            Sorry to disappoint you, but the evidence is abundant, clear, and accurate. Information from over 5,000 climate stations around the world is used to chart warming and cooling trends. Weather and climate change are not synonymous. Climate Change is global. Weather is local.

  • Glen Alan Graham

    Researching climate change is only a “waste of money” if you 1) think research has already proven climate change or 2) you are a climate change denier. And Trump and his brown-nosing staff have made it abundantly clear that they are in group #2.

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      Or ‘group three’ where really stupid people pretend to have value to a conversation where FACTS reign supreme tend to dwell.

      • Grassroots

        From what I’ve read of your posts, Crusty, FACTS seem to have eluded you.

        • CrustyOldGeezer

          I darn, I did so hope that you would like me…

          I always wanted a pet moron in my list of frenz.

          So, how does one, not only live in a “DENIED REALITY WORLD”, but survive the stupidity of ones friends?

    • pineapple

      See my post above.

  • The Capatin

    You’re right, Chief. These agencies don’t need to be armed. The US citizenry does.

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      Do you wonder where that 5.4 BILLION ROUNDS of JHP ammunition is now and who controls it?

      I do.

  • Martbigee

    Trump seems unable to recognize the association between our environment and “keeping America strong”. An unsafe environment causes more of our citizens to die, and/or become sick. Want to protect our Country and keep us strong? Part of doing so requires attention to the environment we live in.

    • CrustyOldGeezer

      you seem to be new.

      ‘hyperbole’ is dealt with rather harshly at times.

      Perhaps if you educated yourself and get up to date on FACTUAL DATA and top pretending that ‘consensus’ has any value in any discussion on any topic.

      “Consensus” is the echo emanating from the bottom of the barrel all the pretenders have their heads stuck in.

      Or, a “consensus” of 20 like minded people out of a field of 60,000 scientists around the world is hardly impressive.

      • Martbigee

        The vast majority of scientists who study and therefor should know what’s “real” and what’s “not real” have determined that global warming is a fact, and that people are by far the largest cause of the part of the problem that’s controllable. There are, however, many other conditions that effect our health and longevity besides warming. Those are facts. You’ve every right to believe whatever you want to believe about our environment. I just hope that those who, like you, can’t accept what’s real, and hold on to “alternative facts”, don’t get in the way of what we AS A SPECIES need to focus on doing to live on a healthy planet.

        • CrustyOldGeezer

          Please provide the documentation that lists the “vast Majority” of which you speak.

          The last time I checked over 60% of the Scientists listed had rejected the use of their name on studies that they had never seen, much less agreed with.

          I should know, I am one of those ‘ex-spurts’ that you seem to worship.

          And, I recently checked the mean seal level at Venice Italy and it hasn’t changed in 200 years.

          But, ya know, that’s just one of those pesky details that can’t be explained away so they are ignored and rejected from publications that want to sell tripe and ignore FACT!

          Grow up little boy.

          • Martbigee

            You believe you’re an expert? I sure don’t. Explain what education and practical experience you’ve had that makes you one? And, by the way, IF 60% of the “scientists listed rejected use of their names”, clearly the other 40% had no problem with seeing their names being used.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            That ‘other 40%’ may have just done an eyeroll and shrugged, and most of them are addicted to government money flowing into their pockets through ‘research grants’, write monthly reports based on other peoples works just to keep those Grant Dollars flowing.

            It’s called ‘gaming the system for financial riches’.

            And an ugly percentage of them are just money launderers that take the money, roll it through a few ‘organizations’ to wash it, then send 30% of it directly back the the politicians that bought them.

            As to my “es-spurt” status, i really don’t give a damn whether or not I have impressed you because you have no value to the conversation.

            You are only here to protect and defend the garbage and the deflection from actual Science that exists in spite of the mantra you spew.

            I recognize you for what you truly are, and you provide the ‘research’ to prove your existence every time you turn on your computer.

          • Martbigee

            So, you are not an expert…exactly! The “60%” who are, never said that the research they didn’t want to have their names associated with was wrong…just that they weren’t a part of it. Lets end this nonsense. You KNOW nothing. You spout, like a water fountain, with just as much intelligence.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            As to my “es-spurt” status, i really don’t give a damn whether or not I
            have impressed you because you have no value to the conversation.

            Maybe if you understood the long words…..

          • Grassroots

            Everyone has value to greater and lesser degrees.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            When the comments have no value, it is noted and the person is rated on the value of the input.

          • Grassroots

            Value is interpreted by you, a truth denier? Sadly, many people fall into that same truth-denier status. At least you have lots of potential friends, though. That’s nice for you.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            No, VALUE is determined by REALITY.

            You need to learn to enjoy Bacon for what it is.

          • Grassroots

            Bacon, beauty, reality, and value? Perhaps you’ve eaten too much bacon.

          • Grassroots

            “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.”

            From information on NASA’s webpage. You do trust NASA, don’t you?

            Here’s the link to the document:
            https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Since it has been proven, and well publicized that nasa did falsify the data collected to maintain their ‘research grants’ and to help ot their ‘little buddies’ with political agendas, you really need to up your game a bit.

            Cutting and pasting a paragraph of gobbledeegoop that fails to mention any of the dreaded “Multiple studies…” is not generally considered “proof” of anything above the ability to cut and paste.

            You need to up your game a bit.

            Your ability to cut and paste from another comment that is based on denying reality is hardly ‘proof of anything.

          • Grassroots

            The problem appears to be that the repubs are willing to discredit any information from any agencies that run counter to what they want to accomplish.

            I don’t believe the conspiracy theorists. They apparently get off on creating fear and panic.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            Still spouting focus group creations and talking points?

            Your brain cell must be so lonely.

          • Grassroots

            Nope, I’m not “spouting” focus group creations and talking points.”

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            You prefer “spewing”?

          • Grassroots

            I prefer spreading truth.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            oh no!!!!

            That would you quit spewing talking points and stop denying REALITY.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            They apparently get off on creating fear and panic.

            You mean like the democrats threatening Senior Citizens with SS cuts?

            Speaking of which….

            With the ‘strongest economy of any president’….

            With that strong of a recovery, why didn’t Social Security get an increase of 5% or even 10%?

          • Grassroots

            Why wasn’t SS granted a payment increase? If I had my way, it would have. The most I can do is keep communication open with my legislators, telling them what I think about upcoming legislation and issues that might need reconsideration. With the current administration dead-set on eliminating or privatizing SS and ridding itself of Medicare and Medicaid, the question about raising SS payout is moot.

          • CrustyOldGeezer

            “Privatizning SS is what SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE from the beginning.

            A PRIVATE manager would have been investing the money instead of rolling it into the SLUSH/ general FUND that is the playtoy of corruption in DC.

            Congress has stolen every penny since the DEMOCRATS broke the fund in 1968.

            Johnson gave his followers a 6-9 TRILLION “gift”.

            The ONLY WAY to ‘repay’ the ‘trustfund is to force the TAXPAYERS to give money to replenish to stolen funds, which are stolen before any “repayment” is done.

          • Grassroots

            Social Security cuts are on the Republican agenda, sir. As are Medicare and Medicaid. In fact it also appears that this administration is determined to remove safety nets for poor people by cutting many social programs that help feed, clothe, and house the poor. In their place, that money would be spent on a gigantic increase in military spending.

            45 has hammered home how he’s all about creating jobs. Cutting funding for public radio and television, arts and humanity programs, social help programs, etc., is going to put a lot of people out of work. That would seem to run contrary to his campaign boasts of full employment.

          • pineapple

            Claim of consensus is fake’
            Plus: Science group ‘reviewing its stance on global warming’ after 160 physicists sign petition

            The following letter signed by five physicists was sent to all 100 U.S. Senator’s on October 29, 2009. The letter is reproduced in full below;

            A GAGGLE IS NOT A CONSENSUS
            You have recently received a letter from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), purporting to convey a “consensus” of the scientific community that immediate and drastic action is needed to avert a climatic catastrophe.
            We do not seek to make the scientific arguments here (we did that in “http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/11/02/team-of-scientists-open-letter-to-us-senators-claim-of-consensus-is-fake/a/1745/Scientists-Write-Open-Letter-to-Congress-You-Are-Being-Deceived-About-Global-Warming–Earth-has-been-cooling-for-ten-years” an earlier letter, sent a couple of months ago), but simply to note that the claim of consensus is fake, designed to stampede you into actions that will cripple our economy, and which you will regret for many years. There is no consensus, and even if there were, consensus is not the test of scientific validity. Theories that disagree with the facts are wrong, consensus or no.

            We know of no evidence that any of the “leaders” of the scientific community who signed the letter to you ever asked their memberships for their opinions, before claiming to represent them on this important matter.
            We also note that the American Physical Society (APS, and we are physicists) did not sign the letter, though the scientific issues at stake are fundamentally matters of applied physics. You can do physics without climatology, but you can’t do climatology without physics.
            The APS is at this moment reviewing its stance on so-called global warming, having received a Team of Scientists’ Open Letter To U.S. Senators: petition from its membership to do so. That petition was signed by 160 distinguished members and fellows of the Society, including one Nobelist and 12 members of the National Academies. Indeed a score of the signers are Members and Fellows of the AAAS, none of whom were consulted before the AAAS letter to you.
            Professor Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
            Professor Fred Singer, University of Virginia
            Professor Will Happer, Princeton University
            Professor Larry Gould, University of Hartford
            Dr. Roger Cohen, retired Manager, Strategic Planning, ExxonMobil
            List of 160 signers of the APS petition available at HYPERLINK “http://tinyurl.com/lg266u” http://tinyurl.com/lg266u
            Climate Depot’s Related Links:
            HYPERLINK “http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/11/02/team-of-scientists-open-letter-to-us-senators-claim-of-consensus-is-fake/a/1745/Scientists-Write-Open-Letter-to-Congress-You-Are-Being-Deceived-About-Global-Warming–Earth-has-been-cooling-for-ten-years” Scientists Write Open Letter to Congress: ‘You Are Being Deceived About Global Warming’ — ‘Earth has been cooling for ten years’ – July 1, 2009
            HYPERLINK “http://climatedepot.com/a/2213/Climate-Revolt-Worlds-Largest-Science-Group-Startled-By-Outpouring-of-Scientists-Rejecting-ManMade-Climate-Fears-Clamor-for-Editor-to-Be-Removed”

            Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed! – July 29, 2009
            HYPERLINK “http://www.examiner.com/x-7422-Cobb-County-Conservative-Examiner%7Ey2009m8d14-Prominent-scientists-push-to-revise-physics-society-climate-statement” American Physical Society to review its current climate statement after a group of 80 prominent physicists petitioned APS revise – May 1, 2009
            American Physical Society editor conceded a HYPERLINK “http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/no_consensus_and_no_warming_either” “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists – 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Polish-Academy-of-Sciences-Questions-Gores-Man-Made-Global-Warming-Theory-43618922.html” Polish National Academy of Science ‘published a document skeptical of man-made global warming’ – April 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03/02/global-warming-pause-print.html” Climate Fears RIP…for 30 years!? – Global Warming could stop ‘for up to 30 years! Warming ‘On Hold?…’Could go into hiding for decades,’ peer-reviewed study finds – Discovery.com – March 2, 2009
            March 2009 U. S. Senate Report: HYPERLINK “http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3” ‘More Than 700 International Scientists Dissenting Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims’
            HYPERLINK “http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Facts&ContentRecord_id=09DF614E-802A-23AD-46C9-8A90FCB5569A” India Issued a report challenging global warming fears – 2008
            HYPERLINK “http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=865DBE39-802A-23AD-4949-EE9098538277” Canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is “settled” – 2008
            Japan Geoscience Union symposium 2008 survey HYPERLINK “http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25182520-2703,00.html” ‘showed 90 per cent of the participants do not believe the IPCC report’
            HYPERLINK “http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2008/08/report-from-33d-intl.html” Skeptical scientists overwhelm Prestigious Geologist conference in Norway in 2008: ’2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC’ & see full reports HYPERLINK “http://www.rightsidenews.com/200808191759/energy-and-environment/global-warming-skeptics-prominently-featured-at-international-scientific-meeting.html” here & HYPERLINK “http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2008/08/another-prominent-scientist-dissents.html” here
            HYPERLINK “http://www.oism.org/pproject/” Petition signed by over 31,000 American scientists: ‘There is no convincing scientific evidence that greenhouse gasses are causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating’ – 2009

          • Grassroots

            I admit that the statistic could be confusing. However, please note that the 97% refers to “actively publishing climate scientists.”

            Physicists are not climate scientists. Their expertise is not in climate study, although they are apparently claiming that they know more than scientists who have spent their careers studying climate matters.

            That would be like asking your family practice doctor if s/he supports the latest advanced research into cancer causation and treatment. They might have an opinion, but how reliable is that opinion? If you had the choice between seeing a family practice doc over a cancer specialist for treatment of bone cancer, say, which one would you choose?

            The evidence for human-based climate change is very clear. I don’t have time right now to go into it, but if you are still interested, let me know and I’ll share my findings, based on my research into the writings of actual climate scientists.

            Thank you for your post. I appreciate hearing divergent opinions.

          • pineapple

            Last month, we are told, the world enjoyed “ HYPERLINK “http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/weather/11351186/2014-was-worlds-hottest-year-on-record.html” its hottest March since records began in 1880”. This year, according to “US government scientists”, already bids to outrank 2014 as “the hottest ever”. The figures from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were based, like all the other three official surface temperature records on which the world’s scientists and politicians rely, on data compiled from a network of weather stations by NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN).
            But here there is a puzzle. These temperature records are not the only ones with official status. The other two, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama (UAH), are based on a quite different method of measuring temperature data, by satellites. And these, as they have increasingly done in recent years, give a strikingly different picture. Neither shows last month as anything like the hottest March on record, any more than they showed 2014 as “the hottest year ever”.
            An adjusted graph from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies
            INCLUDEPICTURE “http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03175/Booker-puerto_3175673a.jpg” * MERGEFORMATINET
            Back in January and February, two items in this column attracted more than 42,000 comments to the Telegraph website from all over the world. The provocative headings given to them were HYPERLINK “http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11367272/Climategate-the-sequel-How-we-are-STILL-being-tricked-with-flawed-data-on-global-warming.html” “Climategate the sequel: how we are still being tricked by flawed data on global warming” and HYPERLINK “http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html” “The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest scientific scandal HYPERLINK “http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html” ”.
            My cue for those pieces was the evidence multiplying from across the world that something very odd has been going on with those official surface temperature records, all of which ultimately rely on data compiled by NOAA’s GHCN. Careful analysts have come up with hundreds of examples of how the original data recorded by 3,000-odd weather stations has been “adjusted”, to exaggerate the degree to which the Earth has actually been warming. Figures from earlier decades have repeatedly been adjusted downwards and more recent data adjusted upwards, to show the Earth having warmed much more dramatically than the original data justified.
            So strong is the evidence that all this calls for proper investigation that my articles have now brought a heavyweight response. HYPERLINK “http://www.tempdatareview.org/” The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) has enlisted an international team of five distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry into just how far these manipulations of the data may have distorted our picture of what is really happening to global temperatures.
            The panel is chaired by Terence Kealey, until recently vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham. His team, all respected experts in their field with many peer-reviewed papers to their name, includes Dr Peter Chylek, a physicist from the National Los Alamos Laboratory; Richard McNider, an emeritus professor who founded the Atmospheric Sciences Programme at the University of Alabama; Professor Roman Mureika from Canada, an expert in identifying errors in statistical methodology; Professor Roger Pielke Sr, a noted climatologist from the University of Colorado, and Professor William van Wijngaarden, a physicist whose many papers on climatology have included studies in the use of “homogenisation” in data records.
            Their inquiry’s central aim will be to establish a comprehensive view of just how far the original data has been “adjusted” by the three main surface records: those published by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss), the US National Climate Data Center and Hadcrut, that compiled by the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (Cru), in conjunction with the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction. All of them are run by committed believers in man-made global warming.
            Below, the raw data in graph form
            INCLUDEPICTURE “http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03175/Booker-graph-2_3175679a.jpg” * MERGEFORMATINET
            For this the GWPF panel is initially inviting input from all those analysts across the world who have already shown their expertise in comparing the originally recorded data with that finally published. In particular, they will be wanting to establish a full and accurate picture of just how much of the published record has been adjusted in a way which gives the impression that temperatures have been rising faster and further than was indicated by the raw measured data.
            Already studies based on the US, Australia, New Zealand, the Arctic and South America have suggested that this is far too often the case.
            But only when the full picture is in will it be possible to see just how far the scare over global warming has been driven by manipulation of figures accepted as reliable by the politicians who shape our energy policy, and much else besides. If the panel’s findings eventually confirm what we have seen so far, this really will be the “smoking gun”, in a scandal the scale and significance of which for all of us can scarcely be exaggerated.
            More details of the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s International Temperature Data Review Project are available on the inquiry panel’s website HYPERLINK “http://www.tempdatareview.org/” http://www.tempdatareview.org

        • CrustyOldGeezer

          I’m curious.

          How many of your own comments have you given yourself a ‘thumbs up’ on?

          It is considered poor form.

  • BuddyBoy53

    Anyone that thinks the billions are actually being spent on a non-existent threat and not for funding the “New World Order” needs their heads examined.

    It’s like thinking they will actually defund Obamacare when all it is is a tax that people are forced to pay with fees and deductables so high, one can not afford to use it. Connect the dots people! They are robbing you blind.

  • TheBucko

    Perhaps we would see honest research regarding our climate if they were not paid to find warming? But these guys seem to live to represent a coming tragedy so that someone will give them money to continue their so-called research.

    • Grassroots

      Honest research is already in place. Unfortunately, deniers refuse to believe the findings.

  • AKLady

    The Trump Administration:
    Government of the people by the people for the people.
    Government of the rich by the rich for the rich.
    Government of the corporations by the corporations for the corporations

  • AKLady

    Survival of America and its people is a waste of money?
    Survival of homo sapien sapien Is a waste of money?

  • Herb1949

    “… Mulvaney was asked about President Trump’s proposal to slash the EPA’s funding and how it would affect governmental research on climate change.”

    Since the climate wackos claim that the “science is settled”, why would we spend anymore money on “climate change research”?

    • KKmoderate

      Exactly!

    • Grassroots

      If not on climate change research, then on climate change amelioration. The science is settled. What we do next is not.

      • Herb1949

        Yeah. right.

        See, 2 positives do make a negative.

        • Grassroots

          I’m sorry you are unable to wrap your mind around the reality of global climate change and warming. I hope you don’t live on the coasts when the oceans rise to cover the land.

  • James Southern

    I am glad he is killing money to be spent on the farce of climate change due to CO2 emissions. I have been ticked off that pseudo-scientists who would rather lie and use propaganda for political or ignorance reasons to scare those whom are either to dumb or to lazy to look into it for themselves and just believe the bogus explanations given by those presented as experts like Bill Nye.

    • pineapple

      For more on this, read “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years” by Singer and Avery, and “Climategate” by Sussman.

      Bill Nye is no “expert”.

      • James Southern

        Nye is about as much of an expert in this as Richard Ramirez was the most sane person in America.

  • RsGoat

    The EPA did not only go over board they turned into a group of bullies. Down the road from me a neighbor has a pond on their property with trails. one of those trails cut by the pond dipping close by the water. It was that way for as long as the pond was there but one day the EPA should up threatening to fine him if the trail didn’t return to nature? Some other people had a hard time with agents getting them to understand beaver build dams! If that is not a story to tell your kids I don’t know what is. It took a lot of work on their part to prove an animal was blocking the water way and not them. This might not be so bad if it were only one government agency but the Bureau of Land Management and IRS are not any better. One changed the rules for cattle grazing on ranchers out west recently creating a lot of havoc while the other sat on 401 and 501 C tax exemption request for numerous groups over 3 election cycles most of those Tea Party, and a token few liberal groups. Recently it came out they did fast track a high school Satan group though?
    It is not just the EPA that let power go to their heads and began sticking it to the American public instead of doing a reasonable job. I’m sure some of these fanatics thought they were doing their jobs, but they were being fanatics and not reasonable! Big difference. They should have remembered as citizen’s we have rights too. Rights to live on our land and use it, apply for allowable exemptions and live with in the law, it is suppose to constrain them too.

  • Kiam Larsen

    Hey Mates, Did you happen to look at Mr T’s “HUGE Increase” in money for the Military. Now that is what I can “Excessive” and I am a Vet

  • The Capatin

    If the EPA really wanted to cut down on CO2, they would shut down half the “alphabet agencies” in Washington DC. They spew out more “greenhouse gasses” than any industry to date, WITHOUT ANY TANGIBLE RESULTS!

    • pineapple

      They would also shut down Congress where all the hot air is coming from.

      • The Capatin

        Is that the ‘Alpha Hotel’ brigade?

  • SD of AZ

    Trump has already identified some and is going to keep at it. Can’t wait for the appointees to begin their changes. Boy are the dem wits gonna whine.

  • Jordan48

    From a purely common sense perspective concerning the phony Global Warming scare, let me make it crystal clear; mankind is not GOD! He can not alter the seasons! He can not control the or effectively harness the SUN. There is no money to be duped from the public in advocating the lie of Global Cooling…but there certainly is a great deal of money to be gained by espousing the lie of Global Warming. If you doubt that statement, look at the “snake oil salesman”, Al Gore! Before the Obamanation administration started pulling federal block grants and funding for projects headed up by honest scientists, they collectively gathered together (approximately 97 of the best known names in the field of scientific studies on this subject) and sent a letter to the POTUS (Obamanation) refuting this false scenario of Global Warming. It was as a result of the Obamanations administrations vehement and aggressive propaganda campaign and the threat of loosing federal monies for their scientific research that some of the scientists eventually recanted and endorsed the lie of Global Warming.

    On it’s face, the Global Warming deception seems innocent enough, but the true underlying reason for the lie is to help support the growing ideology of a One World Govenment. The Bush Administration (both of them) as social elitists, support this Satanic ideology! A One World Govenment will, without a doubt, subjugate ALL the people under this form of governmental rule! The people will loose their individual liberties and freedoms within this new tyrannical form of rule. No rights of freedom of speech that opposes the lawlessness of the new government will be tolerated! No rule of law that guarantees due process will be tolerated. Arrests will be arbitrary and at the discretion of the BIG BROTHER system of government. Indefinate detainment and incarceration will be the norm. Executions, the loss of life, the loss of personal property, all will be subject to the rule of the New World Order. This is the way it will be for all those nations who join the New World Order.

    The fabricated World wide threat to humanity will be the lie that they use to force the establishment of this New World Order. No, I am not delusional. The Holy Bible, in the Book of Revelation, declares that in the last days (the end of this dispensational period of mankind, but not the end of mankind) a One World Government will rise to power. This will be the platform that the Anti-Christ will use to gain almost total world dominion. I said ALMOST. There will be those nations that will not join this One World Government…I pray that the U S of A is one of those who is wise and refuses to be duped into joining this evil empire, whose foundation already exists in the present world of Elitist snobs who enjoy duping the American people, all people, as they form their new kingdom of godlessness and service to the prince of darkness of this world, Satan. Be assured, it is Satan who is behind the building and formation of this New World Order. It is Satan who has sent his unholy angels (fallen angels, extraterrestials to some, and known by many ancient names) to manipulate world leaders through lies and deception as he works more dilligently to subjugate all mankind to gain their worship! Is it not written: “In the last days Satan will send forth his angels to deceive the leaders and rulers of the world.”? Ever ask yourself why we are seeing so many insane liberals rise to power across this world? Open your eyes! Wake UP. We live in the age of great deception! Men, professing themselves to be wise, have become fools. The ways of man seems right, but it leads to destruction.

    • Grassroots

      In response to your statement, “mankind is not GOD! He can not alter the seasons! He can not control the [sic] or effectively harness the SUN,” have you ever heard of solar panels that collect heat from the sun and convert it to usable energy? I believe that is called “harnessing the sun’s energy,” or, for short, “harnessing the sun.”

      • Jordan48

        As a matter of fact I have! My term was “harness” was meant to describe man’s inability to “control it’s movements, not capture it’s benefits with regards to the obvious effects of the Sun. But I think you knew my meaning very well.

        Man can not “control” the elements, merely devise ways to make use of them. That was my exact meaning! So the utter stupidity behind the idea of altering the climate is obviously a con game designed to enrich governments and greedy arrogant politicians. You don’t hear them crying out for money over “global cooling” do you? Some people are stupid but there is no cure for stupidity!

        • Grassroots

          Thank you for clarifying. “Harnessing the sun” can obviously have more than one meaning.

          • Jordan48

            Thank you for helping me clarify my meaning. You were correct to bring it to my attention, lest someone might become mislead.

  • MarcJ

    NASA climate fakers have been fed an annual taxpayers gift of $25 billion for the last 30 years; we have so far gone through New Ice Age, Global Warming, and Climate Change stages in their progress toward a World Socialist Government “to spread the wealth around” – in the immortal words of our Marxist Muslim President from Kenya B. Hussein Obama.

    • pineapple

      Pseudo scientists receive government grants to study global warming. They have an incentive to hype man-made global warming so they can continue to receive government grants.

      They have even manipulated data to justify their claims. (Google “East Anglia lies”)

    • Compte de Grasse
  • Lorraine E

    Global warming and climate change are lies created to further tax and control people world wide. Our weather has been created and controlled by 15 countries since the 1950’s using chemtrails and HAARP. Check geoengineeringwatch.org to learn how easy it is to create and control weather.
    Read Chemtrails, HAARP, and the full spectrum dominance of planet earth” y Elana Freeland and “Chemtrails Exposed” by Peter A. Kirby. More information about geoengineering affects upon us can be found in Jim Marrs book “Population Control.”

    • Grassroots

      I fear you are the victim of fake experts and conspiracy theorists. The evidence simply doesn’t support your statements.

  • Ronney

    I wonder where that piece of shit All Gore is just screaming for more money for climate change. Some of that ammo needs to be used to track assholes like this down and put to good use.

    • pineapple

      Gore predicted oceans would rise by 20 feet, and then he bought a house on the coast.

      • Grassroots

        He did not include a timeline with that prediction, however. Some scientists had/have a problem with such imprecise statements but overall agree that Gore is on the right track.

        People tend to respond more rapidly if they perceive that they will be acutely affected by whatever issue is on the table. If that’s what it takes to get people on board the climate change/global warming train, so be it.

        The question of the century should be, what do we have to do right now to lower CO2 emissions and even reclaim excess CO2 in the atmosphere. Anything else is the equivalent of burying your head in the sand.

        • pineapple

          What Actual Science Says About CO2 & Climate Change
          Over the last couple of decades the public has been inundated and,
          indeed, indoctrinated to believe that a relatively trace concentration
          of naturally-produced Carbon Dioxide (CO2) aided by an extremely-trace concentration of CO2 produced by Man’s use of fossil fuels and industrial processes has now in the 20th and 21st centuries suddenly become the Primary Driver (Forcing Agent) of Climate Change due to the well-known Greenhouse Effect.

          This incredible claim by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is not
          only stunning in its audacity, but the climate driven by our Sun for the
          previous 4.5 Billion years with much higher and lower levels of Carbon
          Dioxide (CO2) concentrations never had much effect on
          temperature or climate; Plus, there has never been any runaway global
          warming – Our Climate Temperature have always cycled between warmer and
          cooler periods and will continue to do so for the next 3-4 Billion
          years.

          GWA Pseudo-Science vs. Actual Science

          The following graph appears in numerous articles, lectures and
          textbooks in support, and it is even asserted as proof, of the Man-Made
          Global Warming / Climate Change Hypothesis — However, it is merely a
          clever trick based on a logical ‘Fallacy of Presumption’ that you will falsely presume, what the years of propaganda have conditioned you to believe, that Man-Made CO2 is the Cause for increased warming of the Earth.

          So what is actually CAUSING the rising temperatures?

          The implied presumption in the above graph is that: The increasing CO2-Concentration Line produced by Man’s fossil-fuel emissions are Causing
          the increasingly warming color-coded temperatures because of the
          implied increased warming due to the Earth’s Greenhouse Gas Effect.

          Although this is the GWA claim, the actual Science refutes this claim:

          Accurate Satellite Measurements of Temperature in our
          atmosphere, including those near the top of our Troposphere at 10 km
          altitude where the Greenhouse Effect occurs show no unusual warming, only natural variation.
          What this graph does not show (i.e., Deliberately
          Hides), is that prior to 1880, we were in the very cold “Little Ice Age”
          (1300 – 1850 AD) so of course it was time for the temperatures to
          increase dramatically during the Modern Grand Solar Maximum (1880 – 2016
          where warming peaked in 1998 & suddenly dropped 1.08 oF and since then, the warming trend has remained flat for the last 18.5 years).
          The temperature has been both high and low when CO2 Concentrations have been both high and low – Indicating that CO2 is not a primary driver nor even a major influencer of climate change. (i.e., During the big ice ages, CO2 levels have been 10-15 times the concentrations of today’s CO2 at 400 ppm x 10 = 4,000+ ppm while the climate was extremely cold).
          Increasing Temperatures produced by the sun’s energy
          evaporate water and carbolic acid from the oceans producing atmospheric
          Greenhouse Gases in these ratios: 95% Water Vapor (H2O) and 4% Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) of GHGs. Al Gore got it wrong, Temperature à CO2 , not CO2 à

          Our Star, the Sun, is the primary source of energy:
          Full-spectrum Electromagnetic Energy which includes visible light, UV,
          Infrared (IR), X-ray radiation, etc. which provides illumination and
          energy

          Although the GWA claim that the Sun’s energy output is a
          constant and that since the beginning of the Industrial Age (i.e.,
          1880) climate change is solely driven by man-made CO2

          200 years ago, Lord Kelvin erroneously believed
          that the Sun’s TSI (Total Solar Illumination) was a constant, but soon
          after his death scientists Maunder and his wife proved this was not
          true. Since that time, much has been learned about the 11-year Schwabe
          solar cycles between high and low solar energy output which is very
          reliably indicated by Sunspot Counts (High counts when very active with
          high energy output and Low counts when the Sun’s is said to be cold with
          lower energy output).
          The Sun’s TSI is quite variable in alternating solar
          cycles between warmer (high-energy output) and colder (low-energy
          output) climate changes.

          In addition, certain portions of the TSI energy spectrum reaching Earth’s atmosphere can be amplified,
          blocked and saturated limiting additional warming in different ways.
          For example the Infrared (IR) range of light is responsible for most of
          the Greenhouse Effect, but as different Greenhouse Gases (i.e., CO2 & Water Vapor (H2O)
          ) approach their respective saturation point, further doubling of the
          quantity produces a pronounced lesser effect until saturated – When no
          amount of doubling of CO2 or water vapor will produce significantly more warming via the Greenhouse Effect.
          This observed logarithmic-saturation effect contravenes the GWA claim of unlimited Runaway Greenhouse Warming due to CO2 — The Greenhouse Effect is Natural and Self-Balancing; Maintaining a balanced pleasant and habitable climate on Earth.
          Many other very-complex factors have effects on our
          long-term Climate due to a combination of cycles of a few years to tens,
          thousands to 100-thousands of years which share in the variability of
          our climate and our seasons – All of these significant influences are
          natural such as our vast oceans and decadal oscillations as well as many
          which are Extraterrestrial — All are beyond man’s control!

          As shown above, this general pattern of ongoing solar cycles over 4.5
          Billion years continually alternating between warm and cold climate
          periods correlates with Sunspot Counts that are consistent with
          the variable energy changes in the output of the Sun which have always
          and will continue to be the Primary Driver & Cause of climate on
          Earth today and in the future.

          When Sunspot Counts are Low, our climate is Cooler and when they are High, our climate is Warmer.
          This dynamic is caused by changes in the Sun’s own magnetic field and
          its impact on earth that is affected by the strength of the Earth’s own
          magnetic field and a number of other complex factors such as cosmic rays
          & the Earth’s orbit and tilt.

          Taking a closer look at Solar Cycles

          The following diagram shows a generalized view of the ongoing solar
          cycles alternating between warm and cold climate periods over the last
          roughly 1,000 years (900 AD – 2016) and the expected trend for the next
          20-30 years where we should experience a much colder global climate
          during the coming Modern Solar Minimum.

          An “Inconvenient Coincidence”’ allowed Al Gore and
          the GWA to Claim: The Primary Driver of Climate Change is No Longer the
          Sun and its Solar Cycles, but now it is Man-Made CO2 from the
          use of fossil fuels. However, Al Gore, UN IPCC & the GWA prefer not
          to mention the Sun and they deny the Sun’s energy output is variable
          and significant. The UN IPCC even tried to hide the existence of the
          very similar and warmer ‘Medieval Grand Solar Maximum warm
          period’ of a thousand years ago from the public — Since it conflicts
          with their hypothesis and it is clear evidence that Solar and other
          cycles are the primary drivers of climate change and that they alternate
          between warm and cold minimums – Not Runaway Global Warming due to greenhouse gases as the GWA claim!

          Controversy Simply Explained & Resolved
          About 2000 years ago, there was a Roman Warm Period and then
          it got cold. About 1000 years ago, there was a Medieval Warm Period
          and then it got cold. That was the Little Ice Age. When Oceans are warm,
          Polar Oceans thaw, snowfall increases and rebuilds ice on Greenland,
          Antarctic and Mountain Glaciers. Ice builds, spreads and makes earth
          cold again. Snowfall decreases and the Sun removes ice every year until
          it gets warm again.

          It is warm again now because it is supposed to be warm now. It is a natural cycle and we did not cause it. CO2 just makes green things grow better, while using less water.

          The alarmists scare us so they can tax and control us.

          Former NASA Scientists and Climate Experts, Thomas Wysmuller &
          Alex Pope, had a brief and effective explanation for the subject of the
          Earth’s Climate Change which fits nicely on the back of a standard-sized
          business card:

          Isn’t it amazing how very simple the answer to the Man-Made Climate Change

          ‘Contrived Controversy’ actually is!

          Climate Change is Primarily Natural Then, Now and in the Future!

          Puny Man and His Impact on Climate is well-within the Range of Natural Variation

          THAT’S IT – CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL!

          Man and his use of Fossil Fuels actually have an Insignificant Impact upon the Earth’s Climate due to CO2
          and the well-known Greenhouse Effect (GE) which is actually activated
          by light in the Infrared (IR) spectrum of the sun’s light which also is
          very limited by natural saturation constraints on the Greenhouse-Effect
          (GE) that maintains a balance in GE-warming keeping it well-within the
          range of Natural Variation! Hence, any unending and run-away GE-warming
          as falsely predicted by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is precluded.

          To the many that have heard all of the Globalist, Progressives,
          Environmentalist and UN IPCC extensive propaganda over the last couple
          of decades who have Grossly Exaggerated a small true fact about Carbon
          Dioxide into their Only Tenuous Link between Climate Change and Man – This statement that: ‘Man & Fossil Fuels have little impact on our climate’ may sound Preposterous, but it is Scientifically True.

          Both the Sun’s and the Earth’s magnetic fields are quite low now –
          Many solar scientists analyzing the current solar patterns compared with
          the past believe that the coming Modern Solar Minimum transition that
          began around 2010 is about to take us to a very much colder climate. We
          have already seen Northern Hemisphere records for winter ice and snow
          broken at the 100-year level and soon possibly 200-year and even
          400-year records-breaks are possible which are similar to the severe
          cold of the Dalton and extremely cold Maunder Solar Minimums during the
          ‘Little Ice Age’ (1300 – 1850 AD). As global temperatures continue to
          cool, don’t be surprised if the GWA begins to spin: “Global Warming
          & CO2 Causes Global Cooling!” – Don’t believe it!

          Don’t just take my word for this, use this link to view an excellent
          factual and scientifically-based video by the actual Climate & Solar
          Scientists that analyzed the Ice-Core Samples, Oceanic and Polar Ice
          Patterns as well as received NASA awards of Excellence for their work on
          Satellite Global Temperature monitoring, etc.

          CLICK ON THIS LINK: https://youtu.be/52Mx0_8YEtg to view this factual movie that explains the true science and politics behind the Man-Made Climate Change Controversy.

          • Grassroots

            Obviously we’re referring to opposing scientific beliefs.

          • pineapple

            Obviously.

          • pineapple

            The
            April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
            The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
            the use of fossil fuels.

            Following is an excerpt from the article:

            “Melting
            ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
            land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
            level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
            sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
            example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
            East Coast.

            The
            biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
            They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
            losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
            seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
            rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

            The
            author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
            occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
            fuels.

            Also,
            there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
            able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
            and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
            which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
            current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
            industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
            to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            Global
            warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
            earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

          • pineapple

            The
            April issue of National Geographic has an article about climate change.
            The article blames global warming on carbon dioxide which results from
            the use of fossil fuels.

            Following is an excerpt from the article:

            “Melting
            ice does not raise sea level – it’s already in the water – but melting
            land ice does. Mountain glaciers are in global retreat. The total sea
            level rise of eight or nine inches since 1900 has contributed to a
            sharp increase in flooding along coasts. During Superstorm Sandy, for
            example, floods and winds caused $68 billion in damage along the U.S.
            East Coast.

            The
            biggest threat is the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.
            They hold enough ice to raise seas more than 200 feet – and they are
            losing it. When Earth was just a bit warmer, 125,000 years ago, they
            seem to have lost a lot: Sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher. Such a
            rise today would swamp coastal cities.”

            The
            author offered no explanation for the cause of the warming period that
            occurred 125,000 years ago. I doubt if it was caused by use of fossil
            fuels.

            Also,
            there was a a Medieval warming period during which Norse explorers were
            able to grow crops in Greenland in areas which are now covered in ice
            and snow. This warming period was followed by a mini ice age during
            which rivers in Europe froze over. This mini ice age was followed by the
            current warming period which began around 1900. This is when the
            industrial revolution started, giving global warming zealots an excuse
            to blame global warming on the use of fossil fuels.

            Global
            warming is influenced by solar activity and also the tilt of the
            earth’s axis, which is influenced by the gravitational pull of Mars.

        • pineapple

          What Actual Science Says About CO2 & Climate Change
          Over the last couple of decades the public has been inundated and,
          indeed, indoctrinated to believe that a relatively trace concentration
          of naturally-produced Carbon Dioxide (CO2) aided by an extremely-trace concentration of CO2 produced by Man’s use of fossil fuels and industrial processes has now in the 20th and 21st centuries suddenly become the Primary Driver (Forcing Agent) of Climate Change due to the well-known Greenhouse Effect.

          This incredible claim by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is not
          only stunning in its audacity, but the climate driven by our Sun for the
          previous 4.5 Billion years with much higher and lower levels of Carbon
          Dioxide (CO2) concentrations never had much effect on
          temperature or climate; Plus, there has never been any runaway global
          warming – Our Climate Temperature have always cycled between warmer and
          cooler periods and will continue to do so for the next 3-4 Billion
          years.

          GWA Pseudo-Science vs. Actual Science

          The following graph appears in numerous articles, lectures and
          textbooks in support, and it is even asserted as proof, of the Man-Made
          Global Warming / Climate Change Hypothesis — However, it is merely a
          clever trick based on a logical ‘Fallacy of Presumption’ that you will falsely presume, what the years of propaganda have conditioned you to believe, that Man-Made CO2 is the Cause for increased warming of the Earth.

          So what is actually CAUSING the rising temperatures?

          The implied presumption in the above graph is that: The increasing CO2-Concentration Line produced by Man’s fossil-fuel emissions are Causing
          the increasingly warming color-coded temperatures because of the
          implied increased warming due to the Earth’s Greenhouse Gas Effect.

          Although this is the GWA claim, the actual Science refutes this claim:

          Accurate Satellite Measurements of Temperature in our
          atmosphere, including those near the top of our Troposphere at 10 km
          altitude where the Greenhouse Effect occurs show no unusual warming, only natural variation.
          What this graph does not show (i.e., Deliberately
          Hides), is that prior to 1880, we were in the very cold “Little Ice Age”
          (1300 – 1850 AD) so of course it was time for the temperatures to
          increase dramatically during the Modern Grand Solar Maximum (1880 – 2016
          where warming peaked in 1998 & suddenly dropped 1.08 oF and since then, the warming trend has remained flat for the last 18.5 years).
          The temperature has been both high and low when CO2 Concentrations have been both high and low – Indicating that CO2 is not a primary driver nor even a major influencer of climate change. (i.e., During the big ice ages, CO2 levels have been 10-15 times the concentrations of today’s CO2 at 400 ppm x 10 = 4,000+ ppm while the climate was extremely cold).
          Increasing Temperatures produced by the sun’s energy
          evaporate water and carbolic acid from the oceans producing atmospheric
          Greenhouse Gases in these ratios: 95% Water Vapor (H2O) and 4% Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) of GHGs. Al Gore got it wrong, Temperature à CO2 , not CO2 à

          Our Star, the Sun, is the primary source of energy:
          Full-spectrum Electromagnetic Energy which includes visible light, UV,
          Infrared (IR), X-ray radiation, etc. which provides illumination and
          energy

          Although the GWA claim that the Sun’s energy output is a
          constant and that since the beginning of the Industrial Age (i.e.,
          1880) climate change is solely driven by man-made CO2

          200 years ago, Lord Kelvin erroneously believed
          that the Sun’s TSI (Total Solar Illumination) was a constant, but soon
          after his death scientists Maunder and his wife proved this was not
          true. Since that time, much has been learned about the 11-year Schwabe
          solar cycles between high and low solar energy output which is very
          reliably indicated by Sunspot Counts (High counts when very active with
          high energy output and Low counts when the Sun’s is said to be cold with
          lower energy output).
          The Sun’s TSI is quite variable in alternating solar
          cycles between warmer (high-energy output) and colder (low-energy
          output) climate changes.

          In addition, certain portions of the TSI energy spectrum reaching Earth’s atmosphere can be amplified,
          blocked and saturated limiting additional warming in different ways.
          For example the Infrared (IR) range of light is responsible for most of
          the Greenhouse Effect, but as different Greenhouse Gases (i.e., CO2 & Water Vapor (H2O)
          ) approach their respective saturation point, further doubling of the
          quantity produces a pronounced lesser effect until saturated – When no
          amount of doubling of CO2 or water vapor will produce significantly more warming via the Greenhouse Effect.
          This observed logarithmic-saturation effect contravenes the GWA claim of unlimited Runaway Greenhouse Warming due to CO2 — The Greenhouse Effect is Natural and Self-Balancing; Maintaining a balanced pleasant and habitable climate on Earth.
          Many other very-complex factors have effects on our
          long-term Climate due to a combination of cycles of a few years to tens,
          thousands to 100-thousands of years which share in the variability of
          our climate and our seasons – All of these significant influences are
          natural such as our vast oceans and decadal oscillations as well as many
          which are Extraterrestrial — All are beyond man’s control!

          As shown above, this general pattern of ongoing solar cycles over 4.5
          Billion years continually alternating between warm and cold climate
          periods correlates with Sunspot Counts that are consistent with
          the variable energy changes in the output of the Sun which have always
          and will continue to be the Primary Driver & Cause of climate on
          Earth today and in the future.

          When Sunspot Counts are Low, our climate is Cooler and when they are High, our climate is Warmer.
          This dynamic is caused by changes in the Sun’s own magnetic field and
          its impact on earth that is affected by the strength of the Earth’s own
          magnetic field and a number of other complex factors such as cosmic rays
          & the Earth’s orbit and tilt.

          Taking a closer look at Solar Cycles

          The following diagram shows a generalized view of the ongoing solar
          cycles alternating between warm and cold climate periods over the last
          roughly 1,000 years (900 AD – 2016) and the expected trend for the next
          20-30 years where we should experience a much colder global climate
          during the coming Modern Solar Minimum.

          An “Inconvenient Coincidence”’ allowed Al Gore and
          the GWA to Claim: The Primary Driver of Climate Change is No Longer the
          Sun and its Solar Cycles, but now it is Man-Made CO2 from the
          use of fossil fuels. However, Al Gore, UN IPCC & the GWA prefer not
          to mention the Sun and they deny the Sun’s energy output is variable
          and significant. The UN IPCC even tried to hide the existence of the
          very similar and warmer ‘Medieval Grand Solar Maximum warm
          period’ of a thousand years ago from the public — Since it conflicts
          with their hypothesis and it is clear evidence that Solar and other
          cycles are the primary drivers of climate change and that they alternate
          between warm and cold minimums – Not Runaway Global Warming due to greenhouse gases as the GWA claim!

          Controversy Simply Explained & Resolved
          About 2000 years ago, there was a Roman Warm Period and then
          it got cold. About 1000 years ago, there was a Medieval Warm Period
          and then it got cold. That was the Little Ice Age. When Oceans are warm,
          Polar Oceans thaw, snowfall increases and rebuilds ice on Greenland,
          Antarctic and Mountain Glaciers. Ice builds, spreads and makes earth
          cold again. Snowfall decreases and the Sun removes ice every year until
          it gets warm again.

          It is warm again now because it is supposed to be warm now. It is a natural cycle and we did not cause it. CO2 just makes green things grow better, while using less water.

          The alarmists scare us so they can tax and control us.

          Former NASA Scientists and Climate Experts, Thomas Wysmuller &
          Alex Pope, had a brief and effective explanation for the subject of the
          Earth’s Climate Change which fits nicely on the back of a standard-sized
          business card:

          Isn’t it amazing how very simple the answer to the Man-Made Climate Change

          ‘Contrived Controversy’ actually is!

          Climate Change is Primarily Natural Then, Now and in the Future!

          Puny Man and His Impact on Climate is well-within the Range of Natural Variation

          THAT’S IT – CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL!

          Man and his use of Fossil Fuels actually have an Insignificant Impact upon the Earth’s Climate due to CO2
          and the well-known Greenhouse Effect (GE) which is actually activated
          by light in the Infrared (IR) spectrum of the sun’s light which also is
          very limited by natural saturation constraints on the Greenhouse-Effect
          (GE) that maintains a balance in GE-warming keeping it well-within the
          range of Natural Variation! Hence, any unending and run-away GE-warming
          as falsely predicted by the Global Warming Alarmists (GWA) is precluded.

          To the many that have heard all of the Globalist, Progressives,
          Environmentalist and UN IPCC extensive propaganda over the last couple
          of decades who have Grossly Exaggerated a small true fact about Carbon
          Dioxide into their Only Tenuous Link between Climate Change and Man – This statement that: ‘Man & Fossil Fuels have little impact on our climate’ may sound Preposterous, but it is Scientifically True.

          Both the Sun’s and the Earth’s magnetic fields are quite low now –
          Many solar scientists analyzing the current solar patterns compared with
          the past believe that the coming Modern Solar Minimum transition that
          began around 2010 is about to take us to a very much colder climate. We
          have already seen Northern Hemisphere records for winter ice and snow
          broken at the 100-year level and soon possibly 200-year and even
          400-year records-breaks are possible which are similar to the severe
          cold of the Dalton and extremely cold Maunder Solar Minimums during the
          ‘Little Ice Age’ (1300 – 1850 AD). As global temperatures continue to
          cool, don’t be surprised if the GWA begins to spin: “Global Warming
          & CO2 Causes Global Cooling!” – Don’t believe it!

          Don’t just take my word for this, use this link to view an excellent
          factual and scientifically-based video by the actual Climate & Solar
          Scientists that analyzed the Ice-Core Samples, Oceanic and Polar Ice
          Patterns as well as received NASA awards of Excellence for their work on
          Satellite Global Temperature monitoring, etc.

          CLICK ON THIS LINK: https://youtu.be/52Mx0_8YEtg to view this factual movie that explains the true science and politics behind the Man-Made Climate Change Controversy.

  • Robert

    The arming of these agencies was an obama move to start a “armed force” equivalent to the military (you remember his 2008 campaign rhetoric?) and as uncivil servants would be his internal unconstitutional army!

    • Compte de Grasse

      Weren’t these the “New Black Panthers” that blocked voters at polling stations who were not registered democrat?

  • Ronney

    Dear Mr. President,
    Please keep draining the swamp, this climate change bullshit being pushed is truly nothing but a hoax. It was just another tool that nigger used to bankrupt America. Now let’s get down to business. Any judge or state officials found to be doing what ever they can to protect illegals from deportation, or sanctuary cities, should be changed with Treason, and sent to Gitmo. We can fill those jobs the liberals think cannot be filled. Just stand in line at any grocery store and check out all the able bodies with EBT cards. The answer is simple put these punk’s to work or they don’t eat.
    All this ammo the obummer administration has stored sell it back to the public. All these so called refugees mainly Muslims the next terrorist attack on US soil round everyone of them up an ship them back to their country of origin.
    Or just give us vets the OK an we will round them up for you. You have my 100 percent respect. Everything you have said an done has turned out to be true, drain that God dammed swamp with force if necessary.
    The no good liberal college’s cut their funding to absolutely zero. If they cannot teach true patriotism for their own country, shutem down. And if you need any help my M-14 is locked an loaded no problem. Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. God bless you Mr president. Sgt USMC

  • MarcJ

    There were 196
    heads of state meeting in Paris in 2015 talking about saving the planet from
    the ongoing Climate Change disaster (not a word about those Muslim terrorists
    murdering the infidels by the hundreds in the same city of Paris). That coming
    disaster was renamed as the Climate Change hoax after 20 consecutive years of
    GLOBAL COOLING from the previous Global Warming scam. Those government-paid
    drones ($25 billion per year of taxpayer funds) worked overtime to “recalculate”
    their computer equations and “recalibrate” their instruments to “demonstrate” retroactively
    how it was still getting hotter instead of colder. The chant of the coming
    irreversible Planet Earth demise was led by our Marxist Muslim President from
    Kenya – B. Hussein Obama – who among many other idiotic statements also
    declared that fighting the Climate Change is the best way to fight the ISIS
    Sunni terrorists. I feel sorry for the citizens of Paris and Nice and Berlin who
    are still having nightmares about the recent wave of jihadist mass murders
    there. To complete that tragi-comedy we just have to wait for the concluding
    speech by our Hussein shouting “Allahu akbar!” Of course – but only after
    bestowing several billion dollars to that socialist UN panel for their socialist
    propaganda.

    He refused to bomb
    ISIS oil fields and their oil-transporting trucks because of possible
    “environmental” damages. That ISIS oil then goes to the Turkish ports to be
    exported to the world markets; let us remember that Turkey is also ruled by the
    Sunni Muslim dictator Erdogan. The money earned this way then serves to buy
    more bombs for the ISIS terrorists – including those curved knives with which
    to cut Christian heads.

    • Grassroots

      The military is very concerned about climate change and global warming. For instance, there are sure to be major changes in the amount of water available around the world as the planet warms. Wars have been started over lesser issues than water rights. Who owns the water and whether or not they’re willing to share that water (among other natural resources) can and will lead to regional wars, which may be likely to escalate into multi-national conflicts. That has nothing to do with our former president and everything to do with greed and hatred.

  • Obie Miller

    “Climate change” has gone on since the world began, and it will continue to do so. Throwing money at the problem —which is needed for things we REALLY could change— is a totally unnecessary waste!

  • Climax change we used to call it weather. I love global warming. Real global worming comes with a North Korean nuke.

  • Walter Flatt

    THE BEST MOVE TRUMP CAN MAKE IS TO MAKE SURE ALL CITIZENS ARE ARMED AND ALL OUR BOYS AND GIRLS IN SERVICE ARE ARMED WITH GUNS LOADED.

    WE HAD BETTER WORRY ABOUT THE MUSLIMS HERE AT HOME.

    PUBLIC LAW 414, PAGE 2, SECTION 212, WAS PASSED IN 1952 THAT BANS ALL PEOPLE TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTY, AND MUSLIMS QUALIF TO BE DEPORTED. READ THE QURAN, THEIR BIBLE.

    COULD IT BE THAT OBAMA HAS SET US UP FOR HIM TO LEAD A MUSLIM INVASION OF OUR COUNTRY? READ THEIR BIBLE, THE QURAN.

    IF NOT,

    WHY ARE THERE 5 MUSLIM CAMPS IN N. VIRGINA, CLOSE TO DC.

    WHY TRY AND BUY UP ALL AMMO AND TAKE OUR GUNS.

    WHY ALLOW IN EXCESS OF 36 MUSLIM CAMPS. (PERHAPS HUNDREDS)

    (BUILD A FEMA CAMP IN EVERY STATE? SOME STATE HAS MORE THAN ONE. BUILT AND SUPPORTED BY YOUR TAX MONEY.

    WHY, WHILE IN OFFICE, DID HE SET HIS CABINET WITH MOSTLY MUSLIMS.

    WHY, WAS HILLIARY’S TOP AIDE A RADICAL MUSLIM,

    LAST WHY, DID OBAMA SEND BILLIONS TO HIS MUSLIM FRIENDS.

  • Mark Plenn

    Climate change is a constant; from day one of the Earth’s existence there has been climate change. These idiot who are crying the sky is falling are just like Al ‘ Capt. Ozone’ Gore who made millions on the ozone scare, Al Gore has his name on the climate scare too!

    • Whaledriver

      Al Gore, owner of an oil company, has made nearly $507 million dollars in environmental causes since running for president. He’s as corrupt as he is dishonest.

      • Grassroots

        Or he made some smart investments and is now reaping the benefits. It appears that you are trying to make this a partisan issue and, thereby, dismissing it as something the democrats have come up with to annoy and confuse the rest of our citizens.

        Scientists live and die by their reputations. If a scientist is publishing and insisting that Claim A is the result of their experimentation, but the results are not replicable by other scientists using the same or similar instruments and methods, that scientist’s reputation for accuracy and honesty will be ruined. No matter how much a scientist is paid to come up with the “right” answer, if they are fraudulent, that’s the end of their career and any monetary reward.

        Lying and cheating are not part of the scientific method. Honesty and accuracy and forthrightness are. Just look at what happened to the scientist who claimed that vaccinations cause autism. His theories have been totally debunked by the scientific community around the world. No other scientist had been able to come up with any evidence that would support his claims.

        Sure, some people are going to believe him anyway. These dubious internet voices trying to make big bucks from attracting followers and advertisers are doing a great disservice to science and parents by spreading false information.

        I believe in science and the scientific method because science works.

        • William George

          What makes you think that all scientist are honest and unerring, in their work.
          Not too long ago some of the IPCC members omitted and supplied in complete data, to make their results come out in favor of human responsibility for climate change, hardly an honest thing to do. but when you get a bunch of peers that are on the same band wagon what can you expect ! If it wasn’t for the climate changing, they would be unemployed.

    • Grassroots

      It is the rapidity of global warming that points to human involvement.

      Why is that such a difficult concept for you? What do you gain from ignoring the facts and repeating the mental wanderings of fake experts? Does that make you feel safer and more grounded? Consider what is in store for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren if we ignore the science and continue on our current path. Science is not the enemy. Ignorance is. Choose wisely, sir. Future generations will pay a heavy price for willful ignorance.

  • William George

    What blows my mind, is that this whole climate hoax, is based on a green house gas that makes up about 1/10 of 1%, while the majority is made up of just over 98% Water vapor, and it is controlled by the amount of sun activity, AIR( of shoot of NASA) is still evaluating the effect of water vapor on our weather, since it is always changing depending on the solar activity and the ever changing amount of vapor in the air at any given time, when it rains it reduces the amount in the air and so on.
    Given these facts it’s not hard to see who’s in control of the climate, and all this money wasted on carbon credits is a scam for governments and vested interests to make money on the backs of those who trust them for leadership, in the environmental welfare of the planet, there is a lack of critical thinking on the public part, and some of it is due to the dumbing down effects, of environmental toxins in the food that is processed and the air we breath, and the water laced with small amounts Of Fluoride.

    • Whaledriver

      The darlings of the global warming community praise nuclear energy, which not only puts out significant heat pollution, but water vapor measured in tons per hour.

      • William George

        When you say “The darlings of the global warming” your referring to whom, the dooms day believer’s, or those who say it’s changing but not cause of humans ?

    • Grassroots

      Upon what do you base your opinion? Have you formally studied climate change?

  • Whaledriver

    For those of you who are wise, you’ll heed these words.

    The sun has 11-year sunspot cycles which are a matter of record. There is a 100-year sunspot cycle where the number of sunspots decline almost to a very few yearly, and a 206-year cycle which is approaching. [For those of you who think and can reason, I refer you to look up the “Maunder Minimum” (1644-1720) and the “Dalton Minimum” (which began in 1793 and eventually caused “the year without a summer,” 1816, and lasted through 1830).]

    According to astrophysicists in the U.S. and Russia, we are approaching another era of very cold weather from 2020–2045, the coldest temperatures of which are likely to occur 2031–2037, due to a dramatic drop in sunspot activity. Just a reminder, one of the hardest winters we’ve faced was in 2014-14, when there was over 16 feet of snow in one month in upper New York: the lakes in Ontario, which usually begin thawing in March-April, were still frozen in late May and early June.

    For those of you who think in advance, there is an excellent, easily understandable book written by John L. Casey. “Dark Winter.” (Humanix Books, 2014-08-19).

    • Grassroots

      There is a difference between global climate change and local weather. More snow in a particular region doesn’t disprove global warming. Global increase in human-generated CO2 causes excess CO2 in the atmosphere. Whatever doesn’t escape our atmosphere is reflected back to earth and is absorbed by the oceans and forests. Unfortunately, greedy corporations have cut down vast acres of primordial forests in the northlands and huge swaths of the Amazon rainforests, significantly reducing the number of trees that would otherwise absorb CO2.

      It’s incorrect to say that sunspots are the cause of global warming. The evidence isn’t there to support that theory. Besides astrophysicists are not climatologists and don’t necessarily study climate and weather in the same way. Just like you wouldn’t trust a dermatologist to perform open heart surgery, looking to astrophysicists for the last word on climate studies is ludicrous.

      • CrustyOldGeezer

        It would be incorrect to say anything you believe is pure stupidity derived from focus group talking points because you so fervently believe what you have been taught to think and it makes your entire world go fuzzy and makes you confused.

        Just another Lemming rushing to jump over the cliff into the sea.

        • Grassroots

          Gosh, you crack me up, Crusty.

  • William George

    What’s the farting matter with you sheeple, no matter how much carbon dioxide, we put in the air it only comes to about 1/10 of one %, hardly and deal maker,, when compared to the rest of the atmosphere and 98 % of it being Water Vapor and controlled by the sun.
    And no matter how much you pay in Fart taxes or scam credits it’s not going to slow down climate change, you sheeple should really do some reading, in stead of spewing out views, of some so called peers, who have a vested interest in keeping you in the dark, that’s become their lively hood. not based on good science, but models full of flaws. the question is Not settled, the only thing settled, is the fear scam agenda to separate you from your money and distract you from the real problems, that require some real honest Leadership.

    • Grassroots

      Yes, the question is settled. The models are rigorously calibrated to provide the most accurate readings possible from the over 5,000 climate stations around the world.

      Conclusion? Excess CO2 produced by human endeavors results in warming of the oceans and increased acidification. The rise of global temperature has been nearly continuous since the industrial revolution and increased dependence on fossil fuels. Tar sands oil extraction, fracking, coal mining, and even huge livestock operations contribute excess CO2 to the atmosphere.

      Deny the facts at your own risk, my frenemy.

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dfb5cb24496746e981a00e786adb77a0705115fe1f788e15d77087d4286ffac6.jpg