tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-89595562024-03-13T11:21:53.988-05:00An Objectivist IndividualistCharles R. Anderson, Ph.D. is a materials physicist, self-owned, a benevolent and tolerant Objectivist, a husband and father, the owner of a materials analysis laboratory, and a thinking individualist. The critical battle of our day is the conflict between the individual and the state. We must be ever vigilant and constant defenders of the equal sovereign rights of every individual to life, liberty, property, self-ownership, and the personal pursuit of happiness.Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/09610765984333672076noreply@blogger.comBlogger1554125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-13614321123956419202024-02-28T23:50:00.003-05:002024-02-28T23:55:53.236-05:00Where is the Investment Money Going in Response to the Left's Irrational Energy Plans?<p>Today's Wall St. Journal has an article summarizing a study by the <a href="https://atlaspolicy.com/" target="_blank">Atlas Public Policy</a> and Utah State University on where the announced investments in the Left's energy policy are to be made. The Atlas Public Policy group is strongly in favor of the Left's "green" energy policies and is not an Ayn Rand-inspired effort. Companies plan to spend $170 billion on projects in response and supposedly create 200,000 new industrial jobs. Most of these projects and jobs are to be in Republican states. New York, Illinois, Colorado, and New Mexico will get a decent share among the Democrat states, but mostly the investment will go to Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. The battleground states of Nevada, Arizona, and Michigan get a great share of the investment money. The top investment states from most to less are: Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan, Indiana, South Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, and Arizona. Not one of these states is a solid Democrat state.</p><p>The announced projects are to make car batteries, electric vehicles, low-emission buses, solar equipment, electrical grid supplies, wind turbines, recycling, mine for critical materials, hydrogen electrolyzers, and carbon dioxide sequestration. Companies are choosing to make most of their investments in Republican states because of lower labor and living costs, lower taxes, <b>more dependable and affordable supplies of electricity</b>, and fewer restrictions on land use.</p><p>Republicans and the residents of these states should not rejoice in this investment overmuch. Most of the investment is malinvestment. It is not in response to real human need and enrichment. It is mostly built upon the fable that oil, gas, and coal use will cause catastrophic man-made global warming. That hypothesis has failed scientifically, though it has become powerful in building special interest groups. More and more people are having doubts about it. In fact, the most reliable data we have in the USA on the direction of the temperature change is that we are in a very moderate cooling stage since 1895. I am referring to the rural weather station data before it is manipulated into a false substantial warming trend, as explained in my article <a href="https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-fake-climate-record.html" target="_blank">The Fake Climate Record</a> using data provided by Tony Heller.</p><p>Many of these projects are going to fail. The money invested in them will be lost. The people hired will learn skills for which there will be no market when they lose their jobs. People will own homes they cannot afford to leave because they cannot sell them in the ghost town that will be left behind when the bubble of "green" energy bursts. Schools and the many service and goods-selling businesses built to serve the workers on these wet-sand projects will be sunk and abandoned. There will be many a tragedy. Much of the investment money would otherwise have gone to the same areas to perform productive work. The people who took dead-end jobs could have taken jobs that were fulfilling real needs and wants. Many good Republicans will be left holding the bag. The Democrats will just tell them coldly to study computer coding as Hilary told the West Virginia coal miners to do.</p><p>Before the Progressives can <b>transform</b> America, they must <b>destroy</b> America. Sowing chaos and creating a state of nihilism is their thing. Destroying our private sector affordable and reliable energy supply is essential for making Americans more dependent upon government and more willing to do as they are told by their elitist betters. In many ways, those elitists will take us back to the Middle Ages so they can exercise unquestioned authority. In their ideal world, the politicians will be the aristocracy and the bureaucrats will be the clerics of the church. The rest of us will be serfs.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-60626898041964349722024-02-25T03:49:00.001-05:002024-02-25T03:50:02.111-05:00The Fake Climate Record<p>Tony Heller became a catastrophic man-made global warming opponent soon after he started looking at the US temperature records back in 2006. His <a href="https://realclimatescience.com/" target="_blank">Real Climate Science</a> blog has revealed many aspects of the fraudulent manipulation of data. He recently recorded a <a href="https://realclimate.science/2024/02/25/us-climate-fakery/#gsc.tab=0" target="_blank">video</a> which provides an excellent overview on the fake temperature records used to change a slowly cooling US temperature trend into a rather strong warming trend. I will summarize a few key observations he makes and add some discussion.</p><p>There is actual measured data at various times going back to 1895 from various subsets of the 1,218 weather stations in the US Historical Climatology Network and then there is the data reported to the public, which has been highly manipulated. The manipulated data is reported for 1,218 stations, whether those stations existed or were active at the time or not! First, consider the 1895 to 2023 average daily high temperature for the months June through August for those stations which actually measured the temperature:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwa5yyBCCGqIif6Z6_GDrN0UzcqiCshjk_Rrw8ymck9dSlAWfDlfmCJw5bKJwnXqOHJSjp5483ebBRvbbKZQZWIQ7WgQBTNGIF2gbGoSilD-0OnO_wOhPL0xTDY4qP3-ZBLamiunHXJrx8qwHWbQMyx7LIueXMgysBTXi-sE1cumiDh1QtId4T/s719/Measured%20Average%20Summer%20Maximum%20Temperature%20for%20USHCN.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="543" data-original-width="719" height="485" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwa5yyBCCGqIif6Z6_GDrN0UzcqiCshjk_Rrw8ymck9dSlAWfDlfmCJw5bKJwnXqOHJSjp5483ebBRvbbKZQZWIQ7WgQBTNGIF2gbGoSilD-0OnO_wOhPL0xTDY4qP3-ZBLamiunHXJrx8qwHWbQMyx7LIueXMgysBTXi-sE1cumiDh1QtId4T/w640-h485/Measured%20Average%20Summer%20Maximum%20Temperature%20for%20USHCN.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>The actual reported temperature measurements show a decrease in this summer maximum temperature of about 0.5 degree Fahrenheit from 1895 to 2023 using a least squares linear fit to the data.</p><p>Now, here is the data reported to the public based on both those stations that actually reported data and those that did not, but who have been phantom members of the US Historical Climatology Network over varying periods of time, often many decades. Actual reported data has been manipulated and the data for non-reporting stations has been generated by computer models that assume that increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes a 2 degree Fahrenheit temperature increase per century. Also, the computer model actually propagates urban heat island temperature increases onto the non-reporting stations.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNAROBHLV8ogFxIFosnHa_KvorhGFlE8w_A6CibJAuMP1nfhPgvuC85KKSXnNoUjI2NJglOf_ETJvcadgIr8w-Ggk8dgffcHQej-OJLP1rkGOAGaKklBsKyT9vPprKiIRk19ly1mrr02toPrGF1JGz5RV7aCvc0FPkmDmxoj7r6-MyjxSS-8mJ/s714/Adjusted%20US%20average%20summer%20maximum%20temperatures%20for%20NCDC.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="714" height="478" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNAROBHLV8ogFxIFosnHa_KvorhGFlE8w_A6CibJAuMP1nfhPgvuC85KKSXnNoUjI2NJglOf_ETJvcadgIr8w-Ggk8dgffcHQej-OJLP1rkGOAGaKklBsKyT9vPprKiIRk19ly1mrr02toPrGF1JGz5RV7aCvc0FPkmDmxoj7r6-MyjxSS-8mJ/w640-h478/Adjusted%20US%20average%20summer%20maximum%20temperatures%20for%20NCDC.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />The final result of this massive temperature data manipulation is a least-squares linear temperature increase from 1895 to 2023 of 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit. A temperature decrease of 0.5 degree F to an increase of 1.2 degree F has been created to fuel the catastrophic man-made global warming fraud.<p></p><p>Tony Heller provides us with a graph showing the manipulated data minus the actual measured data in this graph:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinBQUdteMcQM7Ch7cbv4-oxiDoWmbH5NvlHTqWVIIT0oC90Fh8h6Al94Oi7UU-piCNRb8fqrBjCmg2_garsQ6e2fFTMVepSz5PQ1hBB2BRLvzmCiNc4ia62PttAvFRwW3oI7EXI2lmJdxYN9uiuGGyOUk_m2EJSLgGtI4UJSsPQxMmCic9covm/s687/Adjusted%20USHCN%20minus%20Raw%20Tmax%201895%20-%202024.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="648" data-original-width="687" height="604" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinBQUdteMcQM7Ch7cbv4-oxiDoWmbH5NvlHTqWVIIT0oC90Fh8h6Al94Oi7UU-piCNRb8fqrBjCmg2_garsQ6e2fFTMVepSz5PQ1hBB2BRLvzmCiNc4ia62PttAvFRwW3oI7EXI2lmJdxYN9uiuGGyOUk_m2EJSLgGtI4UJSsPQxMmCic9covm/w640-h604/Adjusted%20USHCN%20minus%20Raw%20Tmax%201895%20-%202024.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>The blue line shows that before about 2010, the temperature record was lowered relative to the actual measurements by as much as 1.5 degree F. Through about half the total period, the temperature was lowered by 1 degree F or more. Scientifically, if the actual measurements are so bad that adjustments of this scale are needed, then all of the data is meaningless and useless as far as the issue of whether there is or is not significant man-made global warming. If manipulations of this scale are needed, then the game is over and we have no historical record at all. The clock is at time zero and a reliable and comprehensive climate station network needs to be constructed and maintained for a century to create the data to see if there actually is any trendline on US and on global temperatures.</p><p>At this point in time, a slowly falling temperature seems more believable than a temperature increase rate which is 2.2 times greater than the measured decrease. I say this based on my belief in actual measurements, but also because I believe that carbon dioxide atmospheric concentrations at anywhere near present levels do not cause significant temperature increases as the CO2 concentration increases. Indeed, additional CO2 in the atmosphere may actually be causing a very slight temperature decrease at present levels. The warming as a result of CO2 is mostly caused by the first few 10s of ppm. I wrote about my concern about these cooling effects of carbon dioxide back in 2010.</p><p>As Tony Heller points out, the reporting of data for 1,218 stations when many fewer stations have commonly reported measured data is one of the most important degrees of freedom that the manipulators have to recreate a biased temperature record. Here are the number of stations that reported June to August data historically:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjI47oE9WmoZqbP0b43G7MEs0tfEw9ixe86UaomZy1ee36tcIK_MlqXo1oiMPTWS693ImDKfnWRmTWVT7csaMrhXvvjFck5Dai1h2MwY16MKNenMWVdpiBQ8ULFe7oB4rKZRI0NvQjPQRafrCAhkbcOzjP1lbME5RQ8f_F68xpX9-x0PCyneVvX/s658/Number%20of%20Weather%20Stations%20of%20USHCN%20reporting%20temperatures%20in%20Jun-Aug%20period%20from%201895%20to%202024.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="655" data-original-width="658" height="638" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjI47oE9WmoZqbP0b43G7MEs0tfEw9ixe86UaomZy1ee36tcIK_MlqXo1oiMPTWS693ImDKfnWRmTWVT7csaMrhXvvjFck5Dai1h2MwY16MKNenMWVdpiBQ8ULFe7oB4rKZRI0NvQjPQRafrCAhkbcOzjP1lbME5RQ8f_F68xpX9-x0PCyneVvX/w640-h638/Number%20of%20Weather%20Stations%20of%20USHCN%20reporting%20temperatures%20in%20Jun-Aug%20period%20from%201895%20to%202024.png" width="640" /></a></div><div><br /></div>From 1895 to about 1920, the number of stations increased very rapidly, allowing the manipulators to create much station temperature data that existed only in their fervent imaginations. The rate of increase in stations until 1989 was pretty substantial also. Then after 1989, there has been a very rapid decrease in stations to about 805 stations. The measured data that is presently going into the data manipulation mill operated by the US federal government is 66% of the stations assigned maximum daily temperatures for June to August. 34% of the stations are "reporting" completely fraudulent data from computer programs with a strong warming bias. The data from the 66% of stations actually making measurements is also manipulated, though with smaller deviations from reality than that assigned to the non-reporting stations.<div><br /></div><div>The federal government has invested hundreds of billions of dollars into what it calls Climate Science or efforts to mitigate a global crisis of its own invention. Its funding of research into climate science has set real climate science knowledge back decades. Its bias for a catastrophic man-made global warming crisis has corrupted the scientific method within this field of study. Tens of thousands of research papers have been written which are laced with total nonsense. Many of those papers have valuable results soiled by surrounding nonsense, which will mean that it will be very difficult to believe the valid results. </div><div><br /></div><div>But science has not been the only casualty. The federal government has created a gigantic special interest group (industries, academics, media, environmental groups, and government agencies) seeking money and attention from federal, state, and local governments, not to mention frightened Americans. Company after company, probably tens of thousands of them, have been created to address the fraudulent problems resulting from the falsified hypothesis of catastrophic man-made global warming. The amount of mal-invested human effort is staggering. The damage to our nation's productivity is a horrible tragedy. And much of the cost of this will fall on Americans of lower income, many of whom have put too much trust in the leaders of American governments.</div><div><br /></div><div>Should Joe Biden win a second term, this fraud will continue without abatement. This grievous con game is strongly supported by the Democratic Party. If Donald Trump wins a second term, this calumny will at least be constrained. Trump did not do as good a job of this in his first term as he ought to have. I sure hope he will do better in his second term, should he get one. At least he states clearly that he does not believe in catastrophic man-made global warming.</div><div><div><p><br /></p></div></div>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-84865557831467849732024-02-16T23:48:00.002-05:002024-02-16T23:48:48.230-05:00Operational Experience with an Electric Vehicle<p>An employee of mine had their car viciously damaged in a theft in Prince George's County, Maryland. All of the windows on the passenger side were broken and the passenger side mirror was destroyed. An EZ-Pass was stolen. The repair is taking weeks. The owner decided to rent a car for the duration. </p><p>A Manager's Special was much less expensive than normal prices. The Manager's Special was a Volvo C40 Recharge, a totally battery driven vehicle. The EPA rates it as having a full charge range of about 226 miles. The car reports its own range at 100% as being 185 miles, perhaps based on its actual history of use. Reviews say it has a quick recharge.</p><p>The employee drove the vehicle to work, a distance of 16.2 miles. The outside temperature was in the low 40s Fahrenheit. This used 11% of the battery charge, implying that the 100% range was 147 miles. The user recharged the battery at home using a regular 120V outlet and a heavy-duty 25 foot power cord. In 13 hours of charging time, the C40 Recharge battery charge increased 21% or 1.6% per hour. This is a bit short of allowing the user to drive to work and return, with no stops at the grocery store or other diversions from the shortest route.</p><p>A grocery store near work has two recharging stations that are rated to provide recharging power of about 8 KW, though people report that the rate is more like 6 to 7 KW. This compares very favorably with the home recharging rate of 0.0763 KW, assuming the long extension cord is not dropping that rate of charge further. Nonetheless, the grocery store recharging station is often not available and using it still means sitting there for about 35 minutes to charge the batteries from 0 to 100%, when the station is actually at 8 KW.</p><p>I have many, many better ways to spend my time than dealing with the recharging issues of an electric vehicle. These vehicles are in no way desirable and any government that wants to force me to waste my time on their idiot idea that these vehicles are to be mandated will earn nothing short of my hatred. Of course, anyone who wants to drive such vehicles is welcome to do so, but I see no reason for governments to subsidize their use.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-41749912761868761832024-01-21T09:36:00.002-05:002024-02-16T22:37:23.110-05:00A Super Majority of America's Elitists Say They are Authoritarians<p>American elitists and registered voters in general were polled by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity on individual freedom, government, and environmental controls. American elitists were defined as those "having a postgraduate degree, a household income of more than $150,000, and living in a zip code with more than 10,000 people per square mile." This group is about 1% of Americans. Additional polling of Ivy League and other highly regarded university graduates was performed. As defined, I am one of this group, though my principles differ with most of them greatly.</p><p>See the results of the survey in <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2024/01/19/survey-two-thirds-of-elites-say-theres-too-much-freedom-in-america/">Evita Duffy-Alfonso's article</a> on the Federalist Daily Briefing.</p><p>Key results summarized from Evita Duffy-Alfonso's article:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Nearly 60% of Elitists think there is too much individual freedom in America. This contrasts with nearly 60% of other registered voters saying there is too little individual freedom.</li><li>More than two-thirds of the Elite want to ration food and energy to control the climate. 90% of the Ivy Leaguers supported such rationing. Two-thirds of normal registered voters oppose such rationing.</li><li>72% of the Elites want to ban gas cars and 81% of those graduates of elite universities want to ban them. Majorities of the Elite yearn to prohibit gas stoves, SUVs, private air conditioning, and non-essential air travel.</li><li>67% of Elites do not believe parents should decide what their children are taught.</li><li>70% of Elites trust the government to do the right thing most of the time.</li><li>About 60% of the Elites have a favorable opinion of lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, and journalists.</li><li>Three-quarters of the Elite support Biden</li></ul><div>It is not just my opinion that Elites are authoritarians. It is their own opinion. They are proud that they are more qualified to manage the lives of the 99% than are the 99%. They are so very smart and so willing to care for the 99%. Yet somehow, the 99% suffer, while they manage to live the high life. Then again, they do call most of the 99% The Deplorables. Or clingers to their guns and religions. Or lying dog-faced pony soldiers, or something like that. Or MAGA extremists.</div><div><br /></div><p></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-29523632580280331202024-01-15T14:25:00.000-05:002024-01-15T14:25:06.352-05:00The Manhattan Contrarian Notes the Insanity of New York Electric Power Mandates<p>The Manhattan Contrarian provides a <a href="https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2024-1-12-updates-on-the-march-to-the-great-green-energy-future">rational evaluation</a> of the mandates of New York on carbon-based fuel power inputs to its electric grid.</p><p>The state of New York mandated in 2018 that 70% of the electricity used in the state must come from renewables by 2030. How is the progress going on that? Based on data presented in the article, in 2023 the total renewable electricity output grew from 24.1% in 2019 to 25.8% in 2023. At this rate of annual increase, by 2030 the renewable share will be 37.7%. Nuclear power output shrank because the state forced the closure of two nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is not renewable, but it is non-carbon fuel. Carbon-based fuel conversion to electric power grew from 33.1% to 41.6% from 2019 to 2023. Yes, far from being reduced, <b>carbon-based fuel increased its share by 8.5%, while renewables increased by only 1.7%!</b> These percentages ignore the source of imported electricity, which was 14.4% in 2019 and 14.5% in 2023.</p><p>Francis Menton notes that the only way to make wind, solar, and other non-hydro renewable energy increase to the mandated 70% level is to use these intermittent sources to create hydrogen gas. There is no reasonable possibility that battery storage will be feasible at the required power levels. What might it cost to convert renewable electricity into hydrogen gas? The United Kingdom just started a large-scale program to produce hydrogen gas, whose combustion creates dihydrogen monoxide. For $306, hydrogen gas with the ability to produce 1 MWh of electricity will be provided to the United Kingdom. Natural gas that produces 1 MWh of electricity is available in NYC at a cost of $11.32. As the Manhattan Contrarian notes, this implies a greater base electric energy cost of a factor of 27. That factor of 27 does not even include the cost of storing vast amounts of hydrogen gas, pipelines to transport it, and power plants to burn it.</p><p>Rational people cannot help but declare the New York state 70% electricity from renewables mandate absurdly impractical. As I have pointed out numerous times, there is no problem with continuing to use inexpensive and reliable carbon-based fuels. Nonetheless, environmental fanatics with their baseless fear-driven fantasies, continue to demand the destruction of our civilization as a small price for their "saving" the planet. We should just recognize them as Nihilists. </p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-18027502114189140742023-12-16T04:21:00.001-05:002023-12-16T04:21:30.222-05:00A Big Picture Reminder on Climate Change<p>We are in the brief warm period of the Pleistocene Ice Age called the Holocene. We are constantly being told that a 1.5C temperature increase means the end of human civilization. In order to prevent that, we must embrace a substantial decrease in our standard of living. Let us examine the temperature record of the past and where we stand amid the temperature cycles of natural forces:</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcYTsldRyk9jXDe2jSi80CBg6GMiTeY9ESKocOB2bawqZEGwEQYnhQnf9eq9ONgHuoM3GQphNfi4v3XxLcRyLO1uooWNjbCY6_ZYswJTZs3YUJZq7wvnool58eh3X4R1bdtVGnhkXTLrnzK_DFDUzgmTO3Xo7n9romTP7gqPSoX1UuvEhcUo6V/s933/The%20Pleistocene%20climate-cycles.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="521" data-original-width="933" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcYTsldRyk9jXDe2jSi80CBg6GMiTeY9ESKocOB2bawqZEGwEQYnhQnf9eq9ONgHuoM3GQphNfi4v3XxLcRyLO1uooWNjbCY6_ZYswJTZs3YUJZq7wvnool58eh3X4R1bdtVGnhkXTLrnzK_DFDUzgmTO3Xo7n9romTP7gqPSoX1UuvEhcUo6V/w640-h358/The%20Pleistocene%20climate-cycles.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /> <p></p><p>The claim that a 1.5C temperature increase means the end of humanity might be tempered against the catastrophe of a 8 - 11C temperature decrease that appears to await mankind in the not too distant future. In comparison, the warming would be welcome. Actually, such a warming would likely do more good than harm even compared to our present temperatures.</p><p>Should the natural temperature drop of past ice age cycles occur, mankind will find it most difficult to maintain a human population anywhere near 8 billion human souls as food production will surely shrink. Let us have warmth as long as possible!</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-11113134135410118402023-10-23T00:40:00.000-05:002023-10-23T00:40:32.896-05:00Phillip Pilkington: The green-energy bubble is about to burst — and thanks to Biden, taxpayers will suffer<div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;">Phillip Pilkington has written an admirably rational evaluation of the IRA, the fragility of the renewable energy industry, and the horrible consequences for the American people. I recommend reading his NY Post opinion article entitled <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/10/19/the-green-energy-bubble-is-about-to-burst-and-thanks-to-biden-taxpayers-will-suffer/?mc_cid=2b75d39aa5&mc_eid=8f1ca16b50" target="_blank">The green-energy bubble is about to burst -- and thanks to Biden, taxpayers will suffer</a>. </span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;">This calamity is perpetrated based on the failed hypothesis of catastrophic man-made global warming. That hypothesis has made prediction after prediction that failed actual observation. By the scientific method, this means the hypothesis is itself false.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;">This is not surprising, since the physics behind the argument is wrong. Additions of CO2 to the atmosphere do not provide added warming at present levels of CO2, since its cooling effects are about equal to the warming effects at the present CO2 concentrations. Almost everyone ignores the cooling effects. Modest warming would actually be good. Added atmospheric CO2 is highly beneficial to plant growth and therefore to all animal life, including humans.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #0d0f0d; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 15px; white-space-collapse: preserve;">How can so many scientists and economists get so much wrong? But they sure have. Note that contrary to claims, there is no real consensus. Only warming projections get published, but even those projections do not agree well with one another. This is not consensus. This is confusion. It is proof of ignorance.</span></div><div><br /></div>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/09610765984333672076noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-77507416624892732152023-10-07T06:16:00.002-05:002023-10-07T20:29:22.188-05:00This Country? My Country. Our Country.<p>The media appears to be mandating a style manual that requires them to say "This country" whenever they refer to the United States of America. Whatever happened to "My country" or "Our country?"</p><p>Whatever happened to Americans having a commitment to the USA? How could you better signal your lack of investment in the United States of American than by constantly referring to it as "This country?"</p><p>The people of Fox, CNN, NPR, ABC, and CBS all refer to "My country" as "This country." We need to ask ourselves why are they so blatantly telling us that they have no deep stakes in the country whose central principle is a respect for the many and broad rights of the individual? Yes, many of those media people are authoritarians with a commitment to destroying the American Principle. Many are the political evolution of slaveholders, the enforcers of Jim Crow laws, educational segregation (Jimmy Carter, Joe Biden and a host of other Southern Democrats), segregation within the government (Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt), the creation of the welfare state and its chains of dependency (FDR, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Jimmy Carter, and Obama), including the discouragement of two-parent families, and a host who argue that some ethnic groups and females are unable to compete in a free market and must be provided with government-enforced advantages.</p><p>But why are the Fox people, who buy into at least much of the American Principle, going blindly along with this alienation for individual rights and for all those individual freedoms that the United States of America advanced more assiduously than other nations did throughout its history? Apparently, they do not understand how they are signaling their own lack of integrity to the most important commitment a civilized people can make.</p><p>Freedom-loving Americans must take adamant possession of the American Principle that every American has many and broad rights which no combination of elitist and no-nothing authoritarians should be allowed to suppress. We should be proud to be Americans, to embrace the American Principle, and to call the United States of America "My country." When talking to other individuals who share these values with us, as all good people should, we should speak of "Our country." Do not allow the authoritarians to dictate an alienated style of speech designed to sever our commitment to the American Principle and our country's proud history of pursuing and adhering to it.</p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-13813190412094261892023-07-06T22:10:00.001-05:002023-07-06T22:10:42.674-05:00Independence Day Sullied by a Climate Change Lying Attack Upon Our Independence<p>The media has been abuzz with claims that this 4th of July was the hottest 4th of July ever. Given the well-known heat waves of 1936 and 1966, along with memories of many other summers hotter than I have experienced in recent years, I was pretty sure this was one more in a long list of desperate lies to try and keep the myth of catastrophic man-made global warming alive. It is that myth which the Biden administration, the Democratic Party in general, the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, and many a kleptocracy have been using as a justification for attacking the many and broad rights of the individual to promote a collectivist lowering of the standard of living of all mankind. Independence Day is anathema to these people, so it must have been very tempting to turn it into an object lesson for catastrophic man-made (man guilty) global warming.</p><p>The vigilant CO2 Coalition has looked into the claims that this 4th of July was the hottest 4th of July ever. Using the data available in the U. S. Historical Climatology Network, NOAA NCEI, for the Lower 48 US states, the maximum average temperature among the weather stations is for the 4th of July:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVZI-jTFZqEzjyJypbtaQaWDizykNo7VbJ03lJx6PuxS9FWU5lUUzPGRxIFu-E22_DnFPK0gJyo84E6OnQoCMK_1gBIphkH69Yq6tAfnXhENflPkIH_AaH5E1bGkdeshdXI_j4i8ipcZwfYV9UNgeHB75S67z0LZdmgUzV4KofkbhdqsRXBR0X/s1342/Maximum%20average%20temperature%20July%204%20from%201890%20to%202023.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="752" data-original-width="1342" height="357" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVZI-jTFZqEzjyJypbtaQaWDizykNo7VbJ03lJx6PuxS9FWU5lUUzPGRxIFu-E22_DnFPK0gJyo84E6OnQoCMK_1gBIphkH69Yq6tAfnXhENflPkIH_AaH5E1bGkdeshdXI_j4i8ipcZwfYV9UNgeHB75S67z0LZdmgUzV4KofkbhdqsRXBR0X/w640-h357/Maximum%20average%20temperature%20July%204%20from%201890%20to%202023.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>This chart does not have the 4 July 2023 data point yet, since NOAA apparently has not yet provided such recent data. Let us suppose that 4 July 2023 actually was the hottest recorded US 4th of July, though I suspect that is not the case. That would only be significant for the claim of catastrophic man-made global warming if it were part of a 4th of July warming trend. Now, despite the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere throughout the period 1890 to 2022, the maximum average temperature on the 4th of July has been nearly constant over the 1895 to 2022 period of time. The trend line has actually shown a small decrease with time!</p><p>The CO2 Coalition has provided us with another way of looking at the temperature record for the 4th of July:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhN78i_LmU5t3p0AvJ5siaMalSCAroysEG_0hPSV0Ul1ZkeVZfWY4_MRoplPF6_d1UkxWqI3hKylANxQTlUlOHiOI69YjzxLu1sqLuV7AFuk4AP1CtCFCN2fVzdDjvmyXjSeBIGdGzpbU38-3si4GKqcL2Nt2YlKllLq6xM-owBGoCnolXMwo3j/s1341/Percent%20of%20Stations%20above%20100F%20on%20July%204%20from%201890%20to%202023.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="755" data-original-width="1341" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhN78i_LmU5t3p0AvJ5siaMalSCAroysEG_0hPSV0Ul1ZkeVZfWY4_MRoplPF6_d1UkxWqI3hKylANxQTlUlOHiOI69YjzxLu1sqLuV7AFuk4AP1CtCFCN2fVzdDjvmyXjSeBIGdGzpbU38-3si4GKqcL2Nt2YlKllLq6xM-owBGoCnolXMwo3j/w640-h360/Percent%20of%20Stations%20above%20100F%20on%20July%204%20from%201890%20to%202023.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>This chart shows the percentage of the weather stations recording temperatures greater than 100F on the 4th of July from 1895 to 2022. This percentage also has a downward trendline. </p><p>If the temperatures of the U.S. 4th of Julys have a story to tell, it is that the U.S. is slowly cooling. If CO2 is the thermostat controlling the climate, then the cooling effects of CO2 have become dominant over increased warming effects at the concentrations reached by about 1950. This would imply that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 for which its warming effect reaches a maximum is about 310 ppm. Above that concentration, additional atmospheric CO2 causes cooling. Of course, choosing a single day of the year is not the best way to determine whether the U.S. is warming or cooling over more than 12 decades. But it is a much better indicator than the one single 4th of July of one year that the priests of catastrophic man-made global warming have offered the world as proof of global warming due to man's CO2 emissions.</p><p>The catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis has been proven false many, many times. It is based on a misunderstanding of thermal radiation, the ignorance of CO2 cooling effects, poor surface temperature records, misguided temperature record manipulations, a wanton neglect of the benefits of atmospheric CO2, an overestimation of the economic harms of warming, and a fervor to reduce mankind's ability to use the resources of the Earth to improve the human standard of living.</p><p>Yet Americans continue to leave northern states for the warming climates of southern states. Apparently, humans prosper in warmth. Imagine that.</p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-35972668258973547772023-03-23T22:25:00.002-05:002023-03-23T22:25:44.130-05:00Acts of Heroism in the Face of Recent Consensus Demands<p><span style="font-family: georgia;"> Jeffrey A. Tucker wrote a marvelous article: </span></p><h2 class="post" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #336699; font-family: Montserrat, sans-serif; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 28px; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; letter-spacing: -0.05em; line-height: 1.2em; margin: 5px 0px 10px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.thesavvystreet.com/jay-bhattacharya-a-rare-act-of-heroism-in-the-pandemic-era/?fbclid=IwAR0uHekwzB-uf4J2esFAZlsxtjIlgyYnWIsk4sgUgtmAS-QR_T25wrmHIkU" target="_blank">Jay Bhattacharya: A Rare Act of Heroism in the Pandemic Era</a></h2><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">It is very much worth reading at Savvy Street, which is a publication website which is often worth reading. The article is primarily a discussion of the absolute demand for consensus on the response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, despite the massive errors of that demanded response. Those who stood against the tide lost badly in their careers, but fought the good fight heroically.</span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">There is a parallel to this quote from the article that I will comment on below:</span></p><blockquote><div><span style="color: #2a2e2e; font-size: 15px;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">The popular press began to go after him savagely, smearing both the study and his motivations (this later became outright censorship). At this point, he began to realize the intensity of the campaign against dissent and the push for full unity in favor of the policy response. It was not like normal times when scientists could disagree. This was something different, something fully militarized, when a “whole-of-government” and “whole-of-society” consensus was being demanded by every institution. That meant no heresies against orthodoxy were allowed.</span></span></div></blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br />The reaction to critics, such as myself, of catastrophic man-made global warming, now called vaguely and unscientifically climate change, was similar, though a bit longer in developing. There is a difference between being told we will all die in 10 years and being told we will all die in the next few months. Nonetheless, professors lost their jobs or lost their funding. Critics in industry lost contracts, other business, and promotions. All of the critics were accused of being on the take from the oil and gas industries, despite the fact that those industries turned tail quickly. Most of the active critics from academia became active only after they retired, but then many died within a few years, so their opposition was of brief duration.<br /><br />Just as the consensus response to SARS-CoV-2 was in massive error, so too has been that of attributing to additions of atmospheric CO2 the power to bring on a catastrophe for mankind. The rapid saturation of the warming effects, ignoring cooling effects while exaggerating warming effects due to fundamental physics errors, manipulating the surface temperature record to warm it in the present and cool it in the past, ignoring the advantages of a warmer climate and of more plant nourishment from the atmosphere, claiming much greater increases in atmospheric CO2 than is likely, greatly over-estimating property damage due to rising oceans, falsely claiming severe weather events have and will increase, and even claiming that more people will die from heat while disregarding that fewer will die from cold -- these are some examples of the massive errors of those claiming a looming climate disaster due to the use of carbon-based fuels, concrete, and meats. </span>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-5460832650923431972023-03-20T23:57:00.000-05:002023-03-20T23:57:12.289-05:00Legalized climate grifting by Paul Driessen<p> <span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14pt; font-weight: 700; white-space: pre-wrap;">Legalized climate grifting </span></p><span id="docs-internal-guid-35d7cbd6-7fff-d0bf-c84a-557565626af4"><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Bill Gates and climatist collaborators are taking taxpayers and consumers on trillion-dollar rides </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Paul Driessen </span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Grifters have long fascinated us. Operating outside accepted moral standards, they excel at persuading their “marks” to hand valuables over willingly. If they ever represented a “</span><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/t-magazine/the-distinctly-american-ethos-of-the-grifter.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">distinctly American ethos</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">,” they’ve been supplanted by con artists seeking bank accounts for funds abandoned by Nigerian princes. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Their artful dodging is epitomized by Frank Abagnale daring the FBI to “catch me if you can,” Anna Delvey inventing Anna Sorokin, Redford and Newman masterminding their famous Sting, and dirty, rotten scoundrels like Steve Martin, Michael Caine and Glenn Headly. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">However, they were all pikers compared to the billion-dollar stratagems being carried off by Climate Armageddon grifters like Bill Gates, Al Gore, Elon Musk and Biden Climate Envoy John Kerry. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Their </span><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/machiavellians-gulling-the-rubes/201512/the-long-and-short-cons-of-master-manipulators" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">long cons</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> are not only unprecedented in size and complexity. They represent the </span><a href="https://www.masterresource.org/goreham-steve/green-energy-greatest-wealth-transfer-rich-history/?mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">greatest wealth transfer</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> in history, from poor and middle class families to the wealthiest on Earth. Most important, </span><a href="https://fee.org/articles/frdric-bastiat-on-legal-plunder/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">the plundering has been legalized</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> by laws, regulations, treaties and executive orders, often implemented at the behest of the </span><a href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/08/17/bloomberg-news-exposes-eco-hypocrite-billionaire-bill-gates-involvement-to-save-biden-climate-bill/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">schemers and their lobbyists</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.</span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(You have to wonder how Mark Twain would update his suggestion that “there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.”) </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They and their politician, activist, scientist, corporate and media allies profit mightily, but legally, if not unethically, from foundation grants, government payouts and subsidies, and </span><a href="https://reformcalifornia.org/news/new-study-exposes-4-5-billion-in-hidden-state-taxes-on-california-utility-bills-climate-mandates-add-even-more-costs" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">taxpayer and consumer payments</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> based on claims that Earth faces manmade climate cataclysms. That most of us are willingly giving money to mandated “renewable energy” schemes and </span><a href="https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2023/03/19/democrats-engage-in-perfectly-legal-corruption-n2620856" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">other corrupt practices</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> is questionable. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Microsoft co-founder Gates’ estimated 2022 post-divorce net worth of </span><a href="https://parade.com/1204965/jessicasager/bill-gates-net-worth/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">some $130 billion</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> enables him to donate hundreds of millions to social, health, environmental and </span><a href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/09/17/bill-gates-buys-the-media-pumps-out-tens-of-millions-of-dollars-annually-to-pay-for-positive-media-moranos-the-great-reset-book-excerpt/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">corporate media</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> causes. That usually shields him from tough questions. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But BBC media editor Amol Rajan recently asked Mr. Gates to answer </span><a href="https://nypost.com/2023/02/09/bill-gates-defends-private-jet-habit-despite-climate-activism/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">charges that he’s “a hypocrite,”</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> for claiming to be “a climate change campaigner” while traveling the world on his luxurious private jets – often to confabs where global elites discuss how we commoners can enjoy simpler, fossil-fuel-free lives: what size our homes can be, how and how much we can heat them, what foods we can eat and </span><a href="https://robertbryce.substack.com/p/the-dark-money-behind-the-gas-bans?utm" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">how we can cook them</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, what cars we can drive, whether we can fly anywhere on vacation, what our kids will learn in school, and more. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Caught flatfooted, Gates defended his use of fuel-guzzling, carbon-spewing jetliners by claiming he purchases “carbon credits” to offset his profligate energy consumption. He also said he visits Africa and Asia to learn about farming and malaria, and spends billions on “climate innovations.” </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Indeed, Gates’ book “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The solutions we have and the breakthroughs we need” calls for replacing beef with synthetic meat. Cattle emit methane, a greenhouse gas (00.00019% of Earth’s atmosphere) – so people should eat fake meat processed from vegetable oil, veggies and insects. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">You may say, That’s disgusting. But Mr. Gates will profit mightily if his “recommendation” is adopted. He’s a major </span><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/mcdonald-s-french-fries-carrots-onions-all-foods-come-bill-n1270033" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">investor in farmland</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and the imitation meat company Impossible Foods, as is Mr. Gore. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">How cool! Wealthy elites can save the world and get richer at the same time! </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Beyond Meat’s stock may be down more than 75% from its one-time high, but investors will likely bring in lots more cash via new “climate-saving” diktats, while consumers are left holding bags of rotting bug and lab-grown burgers. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Carbon offsets? In the real world they’re part of the problem, not the solution. They don’t help Main Street; they too help rich Climate Armageddon Club members become wealthier. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Gates Foundation grants could prevent extensive African misery, brain damage and death from malaria, by spotting disease outbreaks and eradicating Anopheles mosquito infestations – today. But it’s spending millions trying to engineer plasmodium-resistant mosquitoes, which </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-style: italic; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">may</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> pay off a decade from now. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Meanwhile, Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc. continues pocketing billions selling and trading carbon credits. In fact, between 2015 and 2020, the company </span><a href="about:blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">received $1.3 billion</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> from selling credits to other companies – more than twice what it earned from automotive sales. Times sure have changed since manufacturing tycoons got rich selling products, instead of hawking climate indulgences. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Musk also loves flying in private jets. Last summer, he even took a 9-minute, 55-mile flight from San Francisco to San Jose, instead of driving a Tesla. Wags might say that goes well with the way he and others have made a science of lobbying government agencies to subsidize fire-prone electric cars. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It’s all to protect the environment, of course – which is why Gore, Gates, Musk and Kerry think they’re entitled to travel by private jet and limousine. We’re also supposed to ignore how their </span><a href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2021/01/10/watch-morano-on-fox-and-friends-on-bill-gates-private-jet-covid-lockdown-hypocrisy-gates-is-1-carbon-footprint-of-all-celebrity-climate-activists-30k-a-month-electricity-bill-at-his-home/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">cars and lifestyles</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> are based on metals extracted and processed with </span><a href="https://robertbryce.substack.com/p/evs-indicted" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">African child labor</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and lakes of toxic chemicals. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Since Al Gore left the vice president’s office, he’s hauled in </span><a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11653723/How-Al-Gore-300m-climate-alarmism-Former-VP-fortune-losing-George-W.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">some $330 million</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> railing about “rain bombs” and “boiling oceans,” and shilling for government and corporate “investments” in “green energy” that’s also reliant on supply chains running through Africa and China. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Never forget this fundamental rule: Wind and sunshine are clean, renewable and sustainable. However, </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-style: italic; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">harnessing</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> these unreliable, weather-dependent energy sources to power modern economies requires millions of tons of metals and minerals extracted from billions of tons of ores, mostly using dirty, polluting processes in countries that are conveniently out of sight and mind. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-style: italic; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In short, nothing about “renewable energy” is clean, renewable, sustainable, fair or equitable. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Moreover, the “climate crisis” is based on computer models that predict </span><a href="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/10/10/hurricane-hype-lies-censorship-and-reality/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">hurricane</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, </span><a href="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/12/20/tornado/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">tornado</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, flood, drought, sea level rise and other disasters vastly greater than the world is actually experiencing. The models also ignore five great ice ages and interglacial periods, the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, the Anasazi and Mayan droughts, and other inconvenient climate truths. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Topping it off, </span><a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/china-underlines-key-role-coal-amid-energy-security-drive-2023-03-05/?mc_cid=2fa1249dee&mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">China</span></a><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">,</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Russia and </span><a href="https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/india-cheers-return-king-coal-industry-sees-buoyant-future-russell-2023-03-01/?mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">India</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> are burning cheap coal to industrialize, lift people out of poverty, and leave climate-obsessed Western nations in the economic and military dust. Even if the West went totally </span><a href="https://www.cfact.org/netzerorealitycoalition/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Net Zero</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, it wouldn’t reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases even one part per million. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The climate change movement’s deceptions and contradictions seem to have no bounds – and know no apparent limits to how much loot they can </span><a href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/10/07/bill-gates-admits-he-was-personally-involved-bidens-inflation-reduction-act-will-funnel-737-billion-into-gates-funded-projects/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">rake in by lobbying</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> federal, state and local governments, banks and financial institutions; waging media warfare; and engaging in </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-style: italic; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">political</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> science with similarly minded legislators and regulators who control climate and energy laws, mandates, grants and subsidies. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">What about </span><a href="https://financialpost.com/opinion/bank-crises-could-take-down-esg-push?mc_cid=c664ef2ae2&mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">ESG</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, financial disclosure, </span><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/did-esg-help-sink-svb-progressive-climate-bank-bailout-federal-reserve-treasury-biden-insurance-9db64b0b?mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">SVB</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, </span><a href="https://www.newstalk.com/news/why-credit-suisse-might-not-survive-the-weekend-1447662?mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Credit Suisse</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, </span><a href="https://www.outkick.com/ron-desantis-forms-alliance-of-18-states-to-fight-esg-investing/?mc" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">fiduciary responsibility</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, and </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-style: italic; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">accountability</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">? </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">How can the general public be so oblivious to all of this?</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">FTX founder and alleged fraudster </span><a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/sam-bankman-fried-gave-cash-to-liberal-media-organizations-before-ftx-collapse" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Sam Bankman-Fried</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> revealed the secret. He avoided media and regulator scrutiny by donating to influential media outlets, </span><a href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/09/17/bill-gates-buys-the-media-pumps-out-tens-of-millions-of-dollars-annually-to-pay-for-positive-media-moranos-the-great-reset-book-excerpt/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">the way Bill Gates does</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. That garners favorable press and social media – which also ignore, cancel and deplatform critics and skeptics. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fortunately, gutsy interrogators like Rajan are discovering and publicizing what most of the bought-and-paid-for “journalist classes” still won’t. This helps more people see behind the curtain and find the self-interest, self-dealing and pseudo-science that create the scary climate crisis monsters. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Climate Armageddon Club games are </span><a href="https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/are-we-heading-for-a-net-zero-crash/?m" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">costing us trillions</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> of dollars, in the name of saving people and planet. Hopefully, more real journalists, troves of Twitter emails (this time </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-style: italic; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">kudos</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> to Mr. Musk!) and congressional investigations will save taxpayers and families from additional costly, destructive policies. </span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (</span><a href="http://www.cfact.org" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #0070c0; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; text-decoration-line: underline; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">www.CFACT.org</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">) and author of books and articles on energy, climate change, environmental policy and human rights. </span></p><div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div></span>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-84166939097921100932023-02-09T19:39:00.001-05:002023-02-09T19:39:31.981-05:00Are you frightened by the high temperatures of our time?<p> Then you need a bit of historical perspective. Examine the temperature history of the last 4 thousand years recorded in the ice and plotted by the CO2 Coalition:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKZQAgZIWV8xcB_YK2hhlLjMAuhLFfgw7EScAJmC-OLqpCsGdSuYqG2dgdGaHLBZELJ8ZvVAvviQ3x9wkdhLntWJqtxv4qLPXTbfnxoFDu7f1smi2_45Y7W7apg_isLkowgGauVDHcFIHPt_AcdakjV4RB52x-xNFMt7k0X7LfDcBh_dQabg/s1200/CO2%20Coalition%20Temperature%20over%20last%204000%20years.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="675" data-original-width="1200" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKZQAgZIWV8xcB_YK2hhlLjMAuhLFfgw7EScAJmC-OLqpCsGdSuYqG2dgdGaHLBZELJ8ZvVAvviQ3x9wkdhLntWJqtxv4qLPXTbfnxoFDu7f1smi2_45Y7W7apg_isLkowgGauVDHcFIHPt_AcdakjV4RB52x-xNFMt7k0X7LfDcBh_dQabg/w640-h360/CO2%20Coalition%20Temperature%20over%20last%204000%20years.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>Civilizations around the world flourished during the Minoan Warm Period. Many collapsed and people starved when that warm period ended. Athens prospered only in the late, warmer part of the Greek Dark Ages above. Then Roman civilization flourished during the early Roman Warm Period enough to coast through the dip in temperatures in the Roman Warm Period and then collapse as that warm period came to an end. Then followed another colder, hard-life period, before there was a substantial recovery of European civilization during the Medieval Warm Period, only for human lives to become more marginal when the Little Ice Age struck Europe. The Industrial Age began about the time of the sudden rise in temperatures that ends this record of ice temperatures. The increase in temperatures then was not the result of the initial puny industrialization, but more likely was a significant contributor to the conditions that allowed men to make the innovations and investments needed to begin industrialization.</p><p>Warm temperatures have generally been kind to mankind, while colder temperatures have brought great hardship. We should be happy that we are enjoying a time of warming temperatures, though those temperatures are still cooler than they were in many historically known times in man's past.</p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-55794690182052062072023-01-04T18:58:00.000-05:002023-01-04T18:58:03.286-05:00The American Education System and the Mental Health of Our Children<p>Here is yet another way the American education system is harming our children:</p><p>https://catalyst.independent.org/2023/01/03/school-attendance-suicide/?omhide=true </p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-55635254439854036462022-10-24T00:38:00.002-05:002022-10-24T00:38:42.778-05:00Biden's Executive Order 14019 is Designed to Take Over Zuckerberg's Election Rigging Function<p>Walter Donway's article at The Savvy Street entitled <a href="https://www.thesavvystreet.com/is-bidens-executive-order-14019-designed-for-electoral-wrongdoing/?fbclid=IwAR0T3uljLWKAiIPaE7fHN_lNIntRpy8CTVLdZTTj6F2XTB5efrX5bne2w9U" target="_blank">Is Biden's Executive Order 14019 Designed for Electoral Wrongdoing?</a> describes some of the provisions of this little discussed attempt to use the Democrat-dominated bureaucracy of the federal government to rig elections, including replicating much of Mark Zuckerberg's effort in the 2020 election. The Democrats, despite being watched more closely this time, are still hard at work on one task -- cheating on elections. They hide in the dark shadows of their constant false claims that Republicans are the threat to democracy. In fact, there is no greater threat to legitimate government than rigged elections.</p><p>Getting out the vote efforts may sound like a good thing, but they are not when the effort, as in taking the Census, is directed in a partisan manner. If you are only eager to count every person in Democrat-controlled areas, while ignoring those in Republican areas, you skew the apportionment of the House of Representatives and for many state elections as well. If you only try to get out the vote in Democrat-controlled areas, you skew the vote in favor of Democrats. In truth, low information voters are the ones you round up to vote and they tend to vote Democrat. There is really no good to be achieved by having the government encourage people to control the government when they are not at least motivated to vote on their own. If they are not self-motivated to vote, then they are surely not motivated to vote on sufficient information and with sufficient thought. Rounding up the bread and circuses crowd to vote does not promote legitimate government -- it destroys it as surely as Rome was destroyed.</p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-87681172630047379242022-10-20T01:21:00.001-05:002022-10-20T01:21:23.367-05:00Washington Post Opinion: America's Problem is Whites Back the Republican Party<p>How does the Extreme Left discredit the ideas of the Republican Party without once mentioning what those ideas are?</p><p>Perry Bacon Jr. in his opinion piece in the Sunday Washington Post of 16 October 2022 demonstrates the method. He simply notes that the majority of so-called White Americans back a particular political party, namely the Republican Party. One is supposed to see clearly that the Republican Party is awful. All of its purposes and aims must clearly be evil and destructive of American democracy. Yet, he never actually says that so-called White Americans are inherently evil. All right-thinking people know that to be the case, of course.</p><p>If I were to point out that the majority of so-called Black Americans vote for the Democratic Party, I would not assume that anyone would conclude from that that the Democratic Party was dedicated to pursuing evil purposes. Similarly, if I made a point that the majority of so-called Hispanic Americans, and so-called Asian Americans, and so-called Jewish Americans vote for the Democratic Party, it would not be enough for me or any rational person to conclude that the Democratic Party was evil. No, to prove that it was evil, I would have to examine its ideas and aims. But the Extremists of the Left only have to note that any party that the majority of White Americans back is evil, because as we all know, the majority of White Americans are themselves evil.</p><p>To be sure, Bacon does assert that the ideas of the Republican Party are anti-democratic. He does not attempt to prove that or explain that. Essentially, it is assumed anti-democratic because the majority of White Americans vote Republican. That is enough. If my reader has a shred of rationality, and he probably does, he recognizes Bacon to be a severely racist man, or whatever kind of person he identifies as. Unfortunately, there are so many Bacons congregated in Democratic cities that they are very comfortable being group identity racists. They commonly do not know anybody who is not a group identity racist. White Republicans only exist as Deplorables in flyover country, as in-bred hillbillies in remote mountains and the South, or as people who failed to graduate from college. </p><p>The Democratic Party was the party of slavery, the party of Jim Crow laws and segregation (yes, you Joe Biden), the party of the original Klu Klux Klan and of its revival under Woodrow Wilson, and now the party dedicated to keeping Black Americans dependent on welfare, feeling like victims in perpetuity, and forced into government-run schools that do not educate. More and more, American Blacks are beginning to wonder why they have given their allegiance to the Democratic Party since FDR, who was himself a segregationist.</p><p>Ibram Kendi wrote that "The remedy for past discrimination is present discrimination, the remedy for present discrimination is future discrimination." Kendi is a dedicated Black "anti-racist." The logic of that quote says those discriminated against in the past must foster discrimination against those past discriminators in the present. Those discriminated against in the present must discriminate in the future against those who discriminated against them in the present. So, the cycle would presumably be American Blacks were discriminated against in the past, American Whites are discriminated against in the present, and American Blacks will be discriminated against in the future. This cycle of irrational group identity discrimination must continue as long as skin color differs among men.</p><p>This is crazy. The remedy for harmful discrimination is to end group identity racism in the present. Individuals should be evaluated and judged on the basis of their ability and their character. People of merit come in all shades of skin color.</p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-42153934693322124122022-10-09T21:22:00.000-05:002022-10-09T21:22:49.167-05:00Hurricane hype, lies, censorship -- and reality by Paul Driessen<p><span style="background-color: white; color: #202020; font-family: "times new roman", times, baskerville, georgia, serif;">Hurricane Ian is in the history books, having unleashed its Category 4 fury on southwestern Florida. Even as the area slowly digs out and rebuilds, the devastation and tragedies will linger in reality and memories. </span></p><span style="background-color: white; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: "times new roman", times, baskerville, georgia, serif;">Ian was the latest of 123 hurricanes to hit the Sunshine State since official recordkeeping began in 1851. But not surprisingly, some wasted no time trying to link Ian to the most dominant issue of our time.<br /> <br />Climate change is “rapidly fueling super hurricanes,” a Washington Post headline proclaimed. “I grew up [in Florida] and these storms are intensifying,” CNN’s Don Lemon insisted. Rising temperatures in the atmosphere and ocean are making hurricanes “stronger, slower and wetter,” reporter Morgan McFall-Johnsen asserted. They’re becoming more frequent and intense, multiple commentators pronounced.<br /> <br />Ian should have “finally ended” the debate about “whether there’s climate change,” President Biden stated, as he assessed damage along Florida’s Gulf Coast with Governor and <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3Ddc4464fae5%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw2A7Ozt1e6RvsJpDPmceI_l" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=dc4464fae5&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">First Lady DeSantis</a>.<br /> <br />The newest fear-mongering is slightly more sophisticated. Now hurricanes are gaining strength more rapidly, because of fossil fuels. The phenomenon even has a fancy name: “rapid intensification.”<br /> <br />This clever claim cannot be proven or disproven, because we didn’t have technologies to measure how rapidly certain storms intensified even a few decades ago. But for climate-obsessed White House and Deep State officials, news and social media campaigners, and academic and corporate grant seekers, it’s another incontrovertible truth.<br /> <br />It certainly enhances climate propaganda efforts and advances anti-fossil-fuel, pro-wind-and-solar agendas. But are “rapid intensification” and these other assertions supported by actual evidence?<br /> <br />The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides an extensive, handy resource: the <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D0589c379b1%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw0MAm90c1GzTnOBNEIYyKgT" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=0589c379b1&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">complete record of all hurricanes</a> that struck the continental United States (made landfall), 1851-2021. It offers fascinating insights, reveals surprising short term and recurrent <em>cycles</em>, but does not provide data to support claims of any recent <em>trends</em>, such as more frequent and intense, or stronger, slower and wetter.<br /> <br />Among its revelations is the sheer number of hurricanes – hundreds of them, many of which struck multiple states before dissipating, returning to pound other unlucky states, or heading back out to sea to maul Caribbean or Atlantic islands. Florida appears to have been hit more often than any other state.<br /> <br />Also surprising is the number of times New York and other Upper Atlantic States got pummeled. <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D1cecd94542%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw2aYsFarHIZlegNM9YsFjWl" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=1cecd94542&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">“Superstorm” Sandy</a> (2012) was barely a Category 1, but NY State and City have been pounded and inundated by hurricanes as far back as 1869, including two Category 3s, in 1954 and 1985.<br /> <br />Another northernmost cyclone, Fiona (barely a Category 2 when it hit Nova Scotia this September 24), was quickly branded Canada’s “strongest and costliest cyclone on record.” It may have been costly – for the same reason today’s US hurricanes are: extensive, expensive development along coastlines. But the powerful <em>1775</em> Newfoundland hurricane caused storm surges up to 30 feet high and killed over 4,000 people; it’s still Canada’s deadliest natural disaster.<br /> <br />Returning to the southernmost USA, Florida was absolutely slammed by five Category 4, two Cat 3, one Cat 2 and four Cat 1 hurricanes in just six years. Thankfully, it was <em>October 1944 through October 1950</em>, before coastal development took off. But the loss of life was still horrific.<br /> <br />Imagine those twelve hurricanes punishing the state’s Gulf and Atlantic coasts <em>today</em>. It could happen.<br /> <br />Florida got bludgeoned again more recently – with one Category 2, one Category 4 and <em>six</em> Category 3 hurricanes hitting it in <em>just 15 months</em>: August 2004-October 2005. Some would call that an upward trend (doubtless due to global warming). However, <em>not a single hurricane</em> <em>of any magnitude</em> hit Florida during the following <em>eleven years.</em> (Was that significant <em>downward trend</em> also due to manmade climate change? Or must we employ liberal double standards again?)<br /> <br />Even more startling, during the nearly twelve years between Wilma (Florida, Category 3, October 2005) and <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3Dbd8858a4e3%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw2luz3vCvcI19Jf6HqyimSa" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=bd8858a4e3&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">Harvey</a> (Texas, Category 4, August 2017), followed two weeks later by <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D05f988f0f5%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw19S7klFeyBpvgaFWz854iF" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=05f988f0f5&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">Irma</a> (Florida, Category 4) – <em>not a single Category 3-5 “major” hurricane struck the US mainland, anywhere</em>. That’s an all-time record, surpassing the previous nine-year record, set in 1860-1869.<br /> <br />Equally amazing, the USA didn’t experience a single Category 5 hurricane until 1935. The next three struck in 1969, 1992 and 2018. All but Camille hammered <em>Florida</em>. Either these monsters truly didn’t exist before 1935, or we just couldn’t measure winds speeds above 156 mph until the 1930s.<br /> <br />The NOAA records reveal, and experts like <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D547e8a6765%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw2Rna_E_MoXa9F8G67Z2cmz" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=547e8a6765&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">Roger Pielke, Jr</a>. can find, <em>no upward trend</em> in hurricane frequency or intensity. There are <em>cycles</em> of multiple monstrous storms, interspersed with stretches of few or no major hurricanes, or any hurricanes at all. But no discernable trends. (The strength of the epic <a style="color: #007c89; text-decoration-line: underline;">Nueva Senora de Atocha</a> hurricane of Mel Fisher fame in 1622 is anyone’s guess.)<br /> <br />But because of hyper-hyped hurricanes and other climate crisis fables, we’re supposed to abandon the fossil fuels that are 80% of the energy the United States and world require to sustain our factories, homes, hospitals and living standards; that give us affordable food, strong houses, early warning systems, and vehicles with enough fuel to get us out of harm’s way and rescue people trapped by flood waters.<br /> <br />Michael Bloomberg is now funding an $85 million campaign to <em>end</em> <em>petrochemical manufacturing</em> in the United States! That would force us to do without or import feed stocks for nitrogen fertilizers, makeup, paints, pharmaceuticals, synthetic fiber clothing, and plastics for toys, cars, boats, medical devices, packaging, <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D5ee18fde5f%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw0XDXx37UXVSLd-fs1EQDjC" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=5ee18fde5f&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">solar panels</a> – and <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D1daf7826c7%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw3Sd8zsVQV0lTZ14TQZRGb8" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=1daf7826c7&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">wind turbine blades</a> and nacelles. Even the frames on the Glock and Springfield pistols that Bloomberg’s private security guards carry are derived from petrochemicals.<br /> <br />(Billionaire Bloomberg also thinks you just <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D36bd5e66dc%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw3jaihOjDiYeo7rCdiZzIyz" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=36bd5e66dc&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">drop seeds in the ground</a>, add water, they grow and you eat.) <br /> <br />As to that fossil-fuel-free utopia – how many <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D72df7be41d%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw1d4cKULWpE1jz64iPgW2Eq" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=72df7be41d&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">thousands of wind turbines</a>, millions of solar panels and millions of backup battery modules would Florida alone need to power its economy? How many of them would have survived Ian’s, Andrew’s or Michael’s ferocious winds, floods and storm surges? How many years would it take to replace them afterward?<br /> <br />We can build gas turbines and nuclear power plants to withstand these natural furies – and we wouldn’t need many of them. How do we fortify sprawling “renewable, sustainable” energy systems?<br /> <br />So while you’re filling your gas tank, looking at your grocery bill and reflecting on what’s left of your retirement savings, you may want to listen less to Joe Biden and John Kerry – and more to real experts like Joe D’Aleo, Joe Bastardi, <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3Dd7300c3794%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw1fNSZHJZ88KgmB4rNSXoCW" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=d7300c3794&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">Stanley Goldenberg</a>, Roger Pielke, Jr. – and the Miami National Hurricane Center’s <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D7062a5eb2e%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw3YuZWP_JavUzpOic9ueqlQ" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=7062a5eb2e&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">Jamie Rhome</a>, whom Don Lemon tried to browbeat into linking climate change to Ian.<br /> <br />The Biden White House and UN <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D36c2357f65%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw26vXKp4OoJP9KaeJ4SYM_e" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=36c2357f65&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">Intergovernmental Politicized Climate Cabal</a> (IPCC) cannot abide that. They mean to monopolize the conversation, impose their climate and energy agenda, and silence anyone who challenges them.<br /> <br />The White House even has an Office of the <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D29750ae3ea%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw283WYmspCGHvoQlWzX8a5a" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=29750ae3ea&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">National Climate Advisor</a>, which works hand-in-glove with Big Tech and news organizations to censor, deplatform and <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D37e33bd4fa%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw36jkwjLIjmbasiLej99Gdd" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=37e33bd4fa&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">demonetize inconvenient facts</a> about climate models, actual global temperatures, hurricane and climate change reality, fossil fuel benefits, and the massive land areas, raw materials and mining required for wind, solar and battery power. Anything that differs from its narrative is “denial” and “disinformation.”<br /> <br />At stake are our freedoms and living standards, our access to reliable, affordable energy, and the looming specter of life in a totalitarian state of constant deprivation and censorship. Remember that in November.<br /> </span></span><br style="background-color: white; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica;"><span style="font-family: arial, "helvetica neue", helvetica, sans-serif;">Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (<a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u%3Dfa0af696db3407c7d419116c8%26id%3D16094812c8%26e%3D5e0d7d7d9e&source=gmail&ust=1665451322228000&usg=AOvVaw3fiP7sPzK3YHy__m4PIeUQ" href="https://gmail.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=fa0af696db3407c7d419116c8&id=16094812c8&e=5e0d7d7d9e" mcafee_aps="true" style="color: #007c89;" target="_blank">www.CFACT.org</a>) and author of books and articles on energy, environmental and human rights issues.</span></span>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-64569600240478064142022-09-30T21:28:00.002-05:002022-09-30T21:28:43.764-05:00Washington Post: Climate Change is Fueling Super Hurricanes -- Is it really?<p>The Washington Post on 30 September 2022, claimed that "climate change is fueling the creation of super hurricanes." The article says that "as waters warm, 7 super storms have lashed the U.S. since 2017."</p><p>The article argues that ocean water is warming, apparently due to global warming, not either warming or cooling climate change. It argues that hurricanes draw their energy from warm water and therefore become stronger and more frequent. Yes, hurricanes do draw their energy from warm water, but they also require wind shear to form as hurricanes. Since global warming does not much affect the temperature of oceans in tropical regions due to the moderating effects of the water cycle, while it does increase temperatures in the mid-latitudes, the wind shear cause of hurricanes is actually reduced. So what is the historic data on hurricanes? Let us look at the record for hurricanes that had landfalls on Florida:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtP0DVNoMGmijuhxvLnV3Ybf_ImjyYkOHRmyN9zgyWutibRd3_Y74vtRPo8iIEML_iWQnS9WDqtr3qUnRD7SA-T8JVH7fOOVrWNnjCxo3OHbvj4_ytjwf_3U1fkjceA7N-IALH8AygHV03uPn7GX784_aPOziOwrImytMMbB0uDIc_OJg6eg/s766/Florida%20Landfalling%20Hurricanes%20Bar%20Graph%201850%20-%202020.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="766" height="502" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtP0DVNoMGmijuhxvLnV3Ybf_ImjyYkOHRmyN9zgyWutibRd3_Y74vtRPo8iIEML_iWQnS9WDqtr3qUnRD7SA-T8JVH7fOOVrWNnjCxo3OHbvj4_ytjwf_3U1fkjceA7N-IALH8AygHV03uPn7GX784_aPOziOwrImytMMbB0uDIc_OJg6eg/w640-h502/Florida%20Landfalling%20Hurricanes%20Bar%20Graph%201850%20-%202020.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>Maybe you can see the catastrophic increase if the data is plotted as curves rather than as bars?</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDdea1KdfIBTQXrJ8RsNFGaO22XnDu1seDblIAkXWNxF61L-GDukeQ-DCZoYOTgO5N-8Ql1IQJhtAGTuD2PQuBWRSNTKi4tAsWRE_uFEVrJ68qO7w6dfHaM2eVYYQN34uSelcP5Yvsg7rr91AkpCIMh6pkjkFHaHoBE7SQfzIcGBGaOYs7nQ/s836/Graph%20of%20Florida%20Landfalling%20Hurricanes%201850s%20to%202020s.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="510" data-original-width="836" height="390" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDdea1KdfIBTQXrJ8RsNFGaO22XnDu1seDblIAkXWNxF61L-GDukeQ-DCZoYOTgO5N-8Ql1IQJhtAGTuD2PQuBWRSNTKi4tAsWRE_uFEVrJ68qO7w6dfHaM2eVYYQN34uSelcP5Yvsg7rr91AkpCIMh6pkjkFHaHoBE7SQfzIcGBGaOYs7nQ/w640-h390/Graph%20of%20Florida%20Landfalling%20Hurricanes%201850s%20to%202020s.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>I must confess that the frequency of major landfalling hurricanes does not appear to have increased, unless you only look at the timeline beginning about 1980. It seems undeniable that the frequency of all hurricanes since the 1870s has decreased. But, perhaps the focus on Florida is the problem. Let us look at the data for hurricanes landing anywhere on the U.S.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNgX0REqsvuap3BwEc4ygcoGzsoNkqqH_OVgCoGl4AGbU--V8P4vV_fzJWaUh6UMAwF8kw6uQ8lE906-mREL8D2z5Osi5Zqrxa3qzgCTx3DTXwnIzCK88mCBfK2zbuRaxP0mneLMVT3oDNs8UbZJXkdq8YIvRI0_56wtOfjUX21txbqRpCNA/s669/Hurricanes%20with%20US%20Landfall%201850s%20to%202010s.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="417" data-original-width="669" height="398" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNgX0REqsvuap3BwEc4ygcoGzsoNkqqH_OVgCoGl4AGbU--V8P4vV_fzJWaUh6UMAwF8kw6uQ8lE906-mREL8D2z5Osi5Zqrxa3qzgCTx3DTXwnIzCK88mCBfK2zbuRaxP0mneLMVT3oDNs8UbZJXkdq8YIvRI0_56wtOfjUX21txbqRpCNA/w640-h398/Hurricanes%20with%20US%20Landfall%201850s%20to%202010s.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>Do you see a dramatic increase in hurricanes or in major hurricanes in this data? Once again, it seems clear that the total hurricane frequency is actually decreasing. The major hurricanes do not seem to be changing much at all.</p><p>Almost anyone at all serious about climate issues agrees that a five-year span of time is still just weather, while it takes a minimum of 30 years to be considered climate. Note that the Washington Post article was claiming that a 5-year span of hurricane history was proof of man-made global warming, which they ridiculously call climate change. Actually, 30 years is just enough to cover the shortest of the climate cycles, so any real climate argument ought to cover a period of quite a few 30-year cycles.</p><p>Let us examine the historic data on ocean surface temperatures, since the Washington Post argument says hurricane strength and frequency are just a function of ocean surface temperatures.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA-mQSqQC-polYLNtzUykXNXOFX3wNDSZz0twVf9nGShqC6j14bPkwqnSRHc46sADltRmu2IZJXoJW7bdvui3UUs2FcOz7Hu6E0q3uIK4msV8HLq4ncnYNCanX4BtxLTDsBY59TEGrs_2YcAFsW50_Z1sAER_NJRdlP8v4XITC7YtzkYGY-A/s1228/HadSST3%20Global%20Sea%20Surface%20Temperature%20Anomalies%201850%20-%202010.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="927" data-original-width="1228" height="484" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA-mQSqQC-polYLNtzUykXNXOFX3wNDSZz0twVf9nGShqC6j14bPkwqnSRHc46sADltRmu2IZJXoJW7bdvui3UUs2FcOz7Hu6E0q3uIK4msV8HLq4ncnYNCanX4BtxLTDsBY59TEGrs_2YcAFsW50_Z1sAER_NJRdlP8v4XITC7YtzkYGY-A/w640-h484/HadSST3%20Global%20Sea%20Surface%20Temperature%20Anomalies%201850%20-%202010.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>According to this data, the ocean temperatures have increased. They did not change much from 1850 to about 1900. There was a decrease in temperatures from 1900 to 1910, then an increase in temperature from then until the mid-1940s, then was nearly constant from then until the late 1970s, with another increase from then until about 2010. Based on the Washington Post's claim that warmer water fuels hurricanes, the increase in water temperature from 1910 to the mid-1940s should have caused a significant increase in hurricanes. Do you see that in the landfall hurricane charts above? If the effect is there, it sure is small. Then again, where is the major increase in landfalling hurricanes from the late 1970s through 2010 compared to earlier periods?</p><p>If mankind's use of carbon-based fuels is the cause of warming oceans, what huge increase in fossil fuels caused the warming from 1910 to the mid-1940s? Europe was not producing very much for several years following WWI and then no one was during the 1930s. Most of the world's population was not much more industrial than it had been in the 1800s. So, how did this rapid ocean warming occur during this period? I cannot see a good argument for it being due to man's use of carbon-based fuels.</p><p>Let us look at the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere since 1958 and see if we can see a correlation between the CO2 concentration and the ocean surface temperatures.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiukmK8aF8CblLdQHTvZrbpBbQDPgYFEMEEmYLuY_ww5Pb5nqIUk1KFluN4ogJCFNMbNbQth2S-Pa8QQUyHdrGXoV268qzoAOEH3V8ioOzYrA85deGvveHIjLKO55QEia4vukftQkJAQMGkWu9UsuskSaCbiq7Oz4GbaI8RHLdk-C4nZ07MIQ/s1115/CO2%20Atmospheric%20Concentrations%201958%20-%202022.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="503" data-original-width="1115" height="288" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiukmK8aF8CblLdQHTvZrbpBbQDPgYFEMEEmYLuY_ww5Pb5nqIUk1KFluN4ogJCFNMbNbQth2S-Pa8QQUyHdrGXoV268qzoAOEH3V8ioOzYrA85deGvveHIjLKO55QEia4vukftQkJAQMGkWu9UsuskSaCbiq7Oz4GbaI8RHLdk-C4nZ07MIQ/w640-h288/CO2%20Atmospheric%20Concentrations%201958%20-%202022.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>The catastrophic man-made global warming argument is that carbon dioxide is the thermostat for the Earth's temperature, presumably including the 71% of the Earth's surface covered by water. Any claim that CO2 in the atmosphere causes an increase in the temperature has to acknowledge that the warming effect requires more and more carbon dioxide for a given temperature increase. The actual increase in CO2 in this record is a bit faster than linear, but it is not exponential or at all close to it. So, all ocean temperature increases ought to be gradual and constant (or even dropping off) from 1958 to the present. Yet for much of this time, there was no increase in ocean water temperature. Then in the late 1970s the temperature takes off a bit in the ocean temperature record, but where was the acceleration in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere?</p><p>One can only conclude that there is no scientific evidence that CO2 controls the temperature of the oceans and there is none that warming oceans are enough to cause an increase in the frequency and intensity of hurricanes. Therefore, there is no reason to claim that man's use of carbon-based fuels is causing an increase in the frequency and intensity of hurricanes.</p><p>It is very strange that so many people claim to be scientific experts who yet believe in this nonsense. It is also very strange that so many people who have no knowledge about such matters are nonetheless strong believers in the adamant claims of those who claim to know the science, without themselves believing they have any need to understand the science themselves.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-37489726186473748492022-08-25T22:22:00.000-05:002022-08-25T22:22:18.780-05:00The Anti-Economic Freedom Party<p>The <a href="https://www.clubforgrowth.org/">Club for Growth</a> rates each member of Congress annually for their commitment to economic freedom and growth. The 2022 ratings are not available, since the 2022 sessions are still underway. The 2021 session ratings for the House of Representatives, controlled by a Democratic Party majority, are available <a href="https://www.clubforgrowth.org/scorecards/app/?party=all&chamber=H&yr=2021&state=all&rep">here</a>. There are some very important lessons to keep in mind for the 2022 mid-term election coming up.</p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">First, lets get the <b>Big Picture View:</b></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b><br /></b></span></p><p><span style="color: #ffa400; font-size: medium;"><b>Republican Rating Breakdown:</b></span></p><p>28 earned 100% rating</p><p>79 earned 90-99% ratings</p><p>74 earned 80 - 89% ratings</p><p>19 earned 70 - 79% ratings</p><p>7 earned 60 - 69% ratings</p><p>3 earned 50 - 59% ratings</p><p>1 earned 40 - 49% rating</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: #6aa84f; font-size: medium;"><b>Democrat Rating Breakdown:</b></span></p><p>7 earned 10 - 19% ratings</p><p>3 earned 1 - 9% ratings</p><p>210 earned 0% rating</p><p><br /></p><p>First Observation: It is most remarkable that all but 10 Democrats had a 0% rating on economic freedom and growth, making the median Democrat rating 0%.</p><p>Second Observation: The entire range of Democrat ratings was between 0 and 17%. Democrats are extremely united in their opposition to economic freedom and growth.</p><p>Third Observation: Republicans range from 48% to 100%. There are Republicans who are not highly committed to economic freedom and growth.</p><p>Fourth Observation: Democrats universally move in lock-step with Nancy Pelosi and her 0% rating, with a very few symbolic instances of rebellion, often because Nancy Pelosi was not thought to be as strongly anti-economic freedom as the Democrat wanted her to be. Examples -- Ilhan Omar 13%, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 10%, and Rashida Tlaib 10%.</p><p>Many of these 0% Democrats will tell you they favor capitalism over socialism, but that is a lie. They are adamantly anti-economic freedom. They are universally in agreement that we should be driven into energy poverty. They are universally in agreement that we should be hounded by IRS agents armed to the teeth and wasting many tens of hours of our time, with horrible economic costs. They are universally in favor of ever more regulations weighing down small businesses. They are universally in favor of mandating our subservience to corrupt union bosses. They are universally determined to force our children to go to government-run schools where they are besieged with propaganda in favor big government as a supposed protection against immoral businessmen, never mind the immorality of politicians and bureaucrats. Many of these Democrats believe the Earth cannot sustain its 8 billion people and are so anti-human as to suggest that we need to reduce the human population! How can they make that happen? </p><p>Simple -- destroy the capitalist private sector that provides us a high standard of living by putting it completely under the control of politicians, bureaucrats, experts in universities, and union bosses. With the exception of a good fraction of the Republican politicians, these groups are in it only so they can exercise their own power lust. They long for the control of the old Medieval aristocracy and clergy over the impoverished serfs. But now with the establishment of huge databases of information on each of us, they can classify us as being in their camp as fellow elitists, in their camp as deceived dependents, or as their opposition -- that is as The Deplorables. It is The Deplorables who want freedom and in the context of an increasingly authoritarian government, we are the Rebels. Biden just called us near Nazis, revealing his total ignorance and transferring to us his own behavior and motivations. Biden and the Democrats in the House of Representatives see eye to eye. Economic freedoms must be suppressed in order that they can micromanage our lives and make us their serf slaves.</p><p>Of course our freedom of speech, freedom to write and read, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, and freedom of association are all also being ever more restricted too. The Elite aristocracy cannot allow these freedoms either, because they can be used by the rebellious freedom-lovers to deny them power.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-47621195175715054392022-08-08T19:26:00.001-05:002022-08-08T19:26:25.730-05:00Census Bureau Admitted it Over-Counted Democrat States and Under-Counted Republican States<p> I knew that the Census Bureau had been engaged in trying to over-count Democrat strongholds and to under-count Republican strongholds prior to the release of the 2020 Census results. Those results increased the number of Representatives in the House of Representatives for Texas and Florida by one less than independent population experts expected. Other states, such as Arizona, did not gain at all, contrary to the expectation of some. But, I missed the announcement by the Census Bureau in late May that they had errored by over- or under-counting in the following states:</p><p>Over-counted: <span style="color: #2b00fe;">Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and New York</span></p><p>Under-counted: <span style="color: red;">Arkansas, Florida,</span> <span style="color: #2b00fe;">Illinois,</span> <span style="color: red;">Mississippi, Tennessee, Texas</span></p><p>True to the nature of the federal bureaucracy, all of the over-counting occurred in the Democratic states and five of the six under-counted states were Republican states. It makes me wonder if the under-counting in Illinois was predominantly in the larger area of the state represented by the five of the 18 members of the House from that state who are Republicans. Sure enough, the new congressional district map for Illinois now has only four districts that favor Republicans. The one competitive district before, which was held by a Republican, now leans Democrat. One might have expected that the death toll due to killings in Chicago might have led to the loss of more than one Congressional seat in the Chicago area.</p><p>Minnesota had been projected by many to lose a seat, which it did not, perhaps due to the over-counting in Minnesota. New York had been widely expected to lose two seats, but it lost only one, perhaps due to over-counting. Of course, the Census Bureau announced its major errors too late to allow for corrections. We may be stuck with these errors now until the 2032 election.</p><p>We have learned that the old media, academia, and federal bureaucrats are all functionaries of the power-lusting Democrat Party elite. The intelligence agencies, the FBI, and the Justice Department were all in the tank to falsely accuse Trump of Russian election collusion and of improprieties with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy. Then they accused him of inciting a riot that they claimed killed five policemen. He did not incite a riot and no policemen were killed. One later died of natural causes and four later committed suicide. It is mighty depressing to be a policeman in a Democrat run city these days. As for the IRS, we have the example of them running a tyrannical syndicate ungoverned by the rule of law and clearly willing to use their power to go after Tea Party and pro-Constitution organizations. Now, it is about to have 87,000 more agents to attack small businesses and manufacturing firms, who the Democrats count as their enemies. Then there will be all those additional bureaucrats in charge of the alternative energy economy with its expensive, unreliable energy mandates.</p><p>The federal government consists mostly of people who are not your friends. At least not if you are an American who thinks independently, believes in productive work, has earned some property, and does not want to force his fellow man to do his will. The Democrats love using the power of government to make you do their will, however.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-35126127640931360572022-07-27T04:48:00.001-05:002022-07-27T04:48:27.488-05:00Washington Post: Italian farmers are facing 'stomach-churching' heat and dryness<p>The erudite Washington Post, Protector of Democracy from Death in Darkness, reveals its environmentalist religious fervor in a front-page, above the fold article on a hot and dry spell in parts of Italy that is destroying the rice crop yields in the risotto heartland.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeWKc_1j8Q-IEebHFWHetWoXFZh6F7B2vucdzmsNMOgXjGTyZoeJVcp7AEdYebfiDnD06P_sqVBWmv5xlO3wj0UVgfK5KfQnSdrtPY0dfWYdp1GE1z6L_DUp7m7yIudRva-nT-2OKSZ3LYVodDJnnBiAJPBUB0A4bCUbM5I-rGQIEGpn2sWA/s2076/Washington%20Post%2025%20July%202022%20Italys%20Rice.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1452" data-original-width="2076" height="448" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeWKc_1j8Q-IEebHFWHetWoXFZh6F7B2vucdzmsNMOgXjGTyZoeJVcp7AEdYebfiDnD06P_sqVBWmv5xlO3wj0UVgfK5KfQnSdrtPY0dfWYdp1GE1z6L_DUp7m7yIudRva-nT-2OKSZ3LYVodDJnnBiAJPBUB0A4bCUbM5I-rGQIEGpn2sWA/w640-h448/Washington%20Post%2025%20July%202022%20Italys%20Rice.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmHZR4XlJzy5okgCCILw8AQxvh4sX6NQ7oYfn3aI278cUR46Qw_GEjEoSWKrMnM-Uq89m0RAdUiC_UNUd8WsYlV-xl1FjBhbU8v8Cd7qbzruEfPpIR4W4lyi8-7pznS9YXmNVSNO9yVV7uzFQ3Yn-LCjImbMr8OBk1SLNt1rEJSDEN4i_xsA/s1865/Washington%20Post%2025%20July%202022.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /><img border="0" data-original-height="1678" data-original-width="1865" height="576" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmHZR4XlJzy5okgCCILw8AQxvh4sX6NQ7oYfn3aI278cUR46Qw_GEjEoSWKrMnM-Uq89m0RAdUiC_UNUd8WsYlV-xl1FjBhbU8v8Cd7qbzruEfPpIR4W4lyi8-7pznS9YXmNVSNO9yVV7uzFQ3Yn-LCjImbMr8OBk1SLNt1rEJSDEN4i_xsA/w640-h576/Washington%20Post%2025%20July%202022.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>Note the secondary headline: "Farmers in risotto heartland are facing 'stomach-churching' heat and dryness"</p><p>Yet in the fourth paragraph of the text, the Italian farmer says "It's stomach-churning."</p><p>No where in the article do the authors claim that this heat and dryness is the result of catastrophic man-made global warming. There is actually a map in the article that shows that much of Italy is wetter than usual, just as much is drier than usual. That map is not mentioned in the text at all. The chef of a restaurant near the Rizzotti farm is quoted as saying, "As far as I am concerned, this is the beginning of a series of crises that will happen again and again." She is perhaps implying that this event is due to catastrophic man-made global warming.</p><p>But, the authors wisely make no such claim. This is the case more and more often I find. The catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis has suffered such severe scientific failure that the religious environmentalists that want the idea to take firm hold of the minds of the people can themselves no longer risk their reputations on claiming it is scientifically validated. Now, they set up cherry-picked articles for which they know the response of many people will be to assume that the ill event was caused by catastrophic man-made global warming. This article is one such example. It serves the political purposes of those who wish to return to the Medieval Period, however.</p><p>The article is a stomach-churning example of the stomach-churching environmentalists expressing their religious fervor for their irrational cause. As the churches of the Medieval Period were in opposition to the scientific method, so too are the stomach-churching environmentalists.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-472947158240206542022-06-30T20:40:00.000-05:002022-06-30T20:40:08.976-05:00Supreme Court Rules EPA Must Obey the Law<p>It should be obvious that the EPA must obey the law. However, the EPA and every other regulatory agency has long adopted the principle that they can exercise whatever flights of fantasy they wish in interpreting the laws passed by Congress that the agency has been empowered to enforce. The EPA has declared that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act and claimed that that gave it the power to control its emissions from power plants. Carbon dioxide was certainly not considered a pollutant when the Clean Air Act was passed into law. It was declared a pollutant by the EPA under the Obama administration under the claim that it caused catastrophic man-made global warming. That declaration of carbon dioxide as a pollutant had particularly threatening effects upon existing coal-fired power plants. The Supreme Court put a temporary hold on the Obama EPA rules for carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. In 2017, the Trump EPA changed those rules to make them more lenient, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia decided the Trump EPA rules were invalid. This caused West Virginia and 18 other states to appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court.</p><p>If carbon dioxide actually did cause catastrophic man-made global warming, that would still not actually make it a pollutant and it would not really have been addressed by the Clean Air Act. The EPA is required to provide scientific studies proving that an emitted gas is a pollutant. The EPA cited no actual science proving that carbon dioxide caused catastrophic man-made global warming. It did point at the UN IPCC reports, but those reports are only political documents fulfilling the desires of the governments of the world. They are not scientific analyses, though they mascaraed as such. The Summary for Policymakers for each report is written by the political representatives of the governments and any failures of the more detailed "science" sections of the report to support the political Summary for Policymakers are corrected as required. There have been many re-writes of the science sections to make them more supportive of the political ends of the governments. Nonetheless, the unwarranted assumptions and the holes in the scientific argument for catastrophic man-made global warming are apparent to any careful reader of the "science" sections of the UN IPCC reports. Over the years, many of the scientists who wrote the original science sections stopped participating in the writing of the IPCC reports because they were furious about how the science sections were rewritten either by the scientists on the take or by purely political hacks.</p><p>In a 6 - 3 ruling, written by Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court said that it was implausible that the Congress would have given the EPA the power to control carbon dioxide emissions of power plants without saying so clearly and explicitly in the Clean Air Act. He also said that such controls have such a strong effect upon our energy service that such a power requires that Congress address it in law explicitly if those controls are entrusted to a government agency. Indeed, the implication was that any agency making decisions with great magnitude and consequence must have been given that power very explicitly by our elected representatives.</p><p>This ruling is of huge importance for American energy infrastructure and the cost and reliability of power for Americans. It will likely also result in a welcome reduction of regulatory overreach so common for most of our government regulatory agencies. It will force Congress to make laws addressing many issues for which they might rather not take responsibility. The rate of new rulings of government agencies far surpass the rate of new laws produced by Congress. This court ruling will serve as a brake on the rapid growth of government micromanagement of most all aspects of our lives.</p><p>I propose we make 30 June a national holiday called Freedom from Regulation Day.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-65767240184547790632022-06-27T03:19:00.002-05:002022-07-18T18:16:59.364-05:00Self Ownership, Obamacare, and Abortion Rights<p>I was asked to publish the following article at the Savvy Street. I agreed, but I wanted to revise it a bit. The revised version is entitled <a href="https://www.thesavvystreet.com/the-ninth-amendment-self-ownership-and-abortion-rights/">The Ninth Amendment, Self-Ownership, and Abortion Rights</a>. </p><p>The Supreme Court has noted that abortion is not mentioned in the U. S. Constitution. It is not. Neither is it mentioned explicitly that every individual owns his or her own life. Yet those rights acknowledged explicitly in the Constitution in the First and Second Amendments would seem to have a basis in an assumption that every individual owns his or her own life. The right to self-ownership is surely one of the rights that was meant to be protected by the Ninth Amendment. "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."</p><p>The Ninth Amendment is the most important amendment in the Bill of Rights philosophically because it recognizes that an individual's rights are not just a grant of government. It recognizes, as did the Declaration of Independence, that all men are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness --" It is the Ninth Amendment that recognizes the sovereignty of the individual in accordance with our philosophy of government spelled out in The Declaration of Independence.</p><p>Tragically, those who seek to expand the powers of government far beyond its enumerated powers in the Constitution, have never wanted to acknowledge the sovereignty of the individual. His broad rights to self-ownership, to freedom of conscience, and to freedom of association have been subject to frequent violation by government too eager to control the lives of its citizens. The central role of the Declaration of Independence and of the Ninth Amendment have both been denied. This means that many government overreaches that should have been held unconstitutional on the basis of the Ninth Amendment have not been so thwarted. The Ninth Amendment has been almost totally ignored. This has led to many very contorted rulings by the federal courts trying to find some protection of rights that many Americans believe they have somewhere in the Constitution. Justice Clarence Thomas has been notable for his lone attempts to point this problem out.</p><p>It has been noted by many that the Justice Alito argument that abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution and therefore is not a right recognized by the Constitution, opens the door for making a similar argument against a right to same-sex marriages, the use of contraceptives, and interracial marriages. Based on the Alito argument, each of these rights might be returned to the states for legislation limiting or protecting them. These rights, as is the case with an abortion right, must have their proper basis in the right to self-ownership and freedom of association, both of which should be seen as protected by the Ninth Amendment.</p><p>The abortion rights decision by the Supreme Court has greatly angered many people, most of whom have consistently voted for the Democratic Party, though a sizeable fraction of Republicans also believe in abortion rights. The Democratic Party has been most vociferous in its denial of the right to self-ownership in all contexts but one and in its denial of the protections of the Ninth Amendment. The existence of an abortion right must start with a woman's ownership of her own body. </p><p>One of the best examples of the Democratic Party interfering with the right to self-ownership was the enactment of Obamacare. Every Democrat Senator and 87% of the Democrats in the House of Representatives voted for Obamacare. They spent an incredible amount of political capital on this highly unpopular legislation. While there were other reasons why many Democrats wanted this control over the maintenance of every American's mind and body, many wanted and understood that they were really asserting a principle that no one owned their own mind and body exclusively. They asserted that there was a collective ownership of every person's mind and body, which gave the collective, acting through the government, the right to dictate how every American would maintain his or her own mind and body. The principle of collective ownership of our minds and bodies was explicitly noted in the first income tax return Obamacare applied to that designated the tax penalty line Shared Collective Responsibility. I made the argument at the time that this assertion of collective ownership was the real issue with Obamacare, but almost no one supported me in this.</p><p>So now many women are furious that their abortion rights may be limited by the state they or other women live in. They insist that they own their own bodies and should have the right to decide for themselves whether they will have an abortion or not. Unfortunately, it does not dawn on them that if there is a right to self-ownership, then it applies far more broadly than just to abortion issues. It surely also applies to the right that every individual, man or woman, has to determine how they will use and maintain their bodies. It applied to Obamacare and many other examples of government limits on our board sovereign individual rights to self-ownership, including the ownership of our labor and our freedom of contract. But no, selective assertion of a broad principle is all they care about. Because of that failure to think in terms of principles, the Supreme Court now has no basis to assert any national abortion right. The matter has been turned over to the states to decide.</p><p>I believe a woman has an abortion right, but its boundary is limited by that time when the development of a fetus makes it a human being protected from murder, or by when it is capable of independent life. I am not asserting where that boundary is. That is a thorny problem. Perhaps that is a problem best left to the states and the more local beliefs of the people who live in those states. However, wherever those decisions are made, if a woman has an abortion right, it is critically dependent upon her right to self-ownership. Women who want to assert this right, ought to assert the right to self-ownership for every individual, man or woman, in all the contexts to which it applies. If they do this, government will be far more limited than it is today and everyone but a few invidious special interests will benefit immensely.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-84000823955187526292022-06-16T23:16:00.000-05:002022-06-16T23:16:01.636-05:00USA Gasoline Price Skyrockets in Accordance with Democrat Energy Policy<p> The USA average gasoline price from June 2020 to June 2022 is charted below:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLNhLbKNeKECaRjwPICAKFUf91lwgTaYy3FwGTcczkSdOsPaYusyGde6zif7zSPtUlF1UA4YubBnOUK9O_Q1hbdgk37zVjldEpePbMeLddOUzT8jhD3fndiTyTPGWOlqAr3i4ip80RvNMjK_-0ix-9vu60q60-YSEb3M8WUT6xQIxliULGLA/s1490/USA%20Average%20Gas%20Prices%20Jun%202020%20to%20Jun%202022.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="737" data-original-width="1490" height="317" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLNhLbKNeKECaRjwPICAKFUf91lwgTaYy3FwGTcczkSdOsPaYusyGde6zif7zSPtUlF1UA4YubBnOUK9O_Q1hbdgk37zVjldEpePbMeLddOUzT8jhD3fndiTyTPGWOlqAr3i4ip80RvNMjK_-0ix-9vu60q60-YSEb3M8WUT6xQIxliULGLA/w640-h317/USA%20Average%20Gas%20Prices%20Jun%202020%20to%20Jun%202022.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>For the last 6 months of 2020, the price of gasoline averaged about $2.20/gal. The outcome of the 2020 election put the Democrats solidly in control of US energy policy. The Democrats were really going to be able to pursue their long-stated goal of seeking the death of the American oil and gas industry, since they controlled the Presidency and both houses of the Congress. The oil and gas industry had no choice but to respond with drastic investment caution as the Democrats canceled the Keystone XL Pipeline once again, canceled oil and gas leases, and put huge tracts of US land with great deposits of oil and gas off limits for development. Over time, it also became clear that the government was canceling many other environmental permits actually needed to produce oil from existing oil leases and that it was generally preventing the building of new oil and gas pipelines.</p><p>Keeping oil and gas production in the US at a constant level requires a constant investment of effort and money. This is even more true now that so much of our production is due to fracking. The inevitable result of the Democrat anti-carbon fuel policies was that the US oil and gas industry was not willing to invest enough money to increase production enough to keep gasoline prices low. The Democrats made it too hard to do so and any investment the oil and gas industry made was subject to later annihilation as the Democrats pursued their stated goal to kill the oil and gas industry.</p><p>The Democrats and the Federal Reserve also proceeded to flood the economy with new money. The Treasury Department money presses printed money day and night, without pause. The employees manning the presses and verifying the paper and ink ingredients were virtually flogged to print record amounts of new money. Congress passed major spending bills and the Federal Reserve pursued its own money supply expansion policies. The result was that the measure of the money supply called M2 increased rapidly from June 2021 to January 2022. This generated a general price increase in almost all goods and services. Oil and gas products could not be an exception.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKFE9__iyf4K1PvTwgyqZ9v2ks6kA8BoN7W7F3D5oS9mCU6b2vZYivwYZsA0Uo2LVASdTb_VNbpZ8b55V4DYqzBOtfNj74BwCexLkaxfZqHfYUauPtmm1GAR6ci6skQO0fc5HCiEBUD0ZZ6sgIf_T0E6h2q3i_VRp1mCScUDtFSno8vfg1zg/s769/US%20Money%20Supply%20M2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="368" data-original-width="769" height="306" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKFE9__iyf4K1PvTwgyqZ9v2ks6kA8BoN7W7F3D5oS9mCU6b2vZYivwYZsA0Uo2LVASdTb_VNbpZ8b55V4DYqzBOtfNj74BwCexLkaxfZqHfYUauPtmm1GAR6ci6skQO0fc5HCiEBUD0ZZ6sgIf_T0E6h2q3i_VRp1mCScUDtFSno8vfg1zg/w640-h306/US%20Money%20Supply%20M2.png" width="640" /></a></div><p>Biden and the Democrats keep claiming these factors are not the cause of the gas price increases. They say they were caused by increased demand as the economy recovered from Covid-19 and by Putin. The economy was recovering, but the oil and gas industry had been readily able to supply an economy of equal size prior to the Covid-19 contraction. Despite the Democrats, the oil and gas industry has steadily increased the number of active oil rigs since the minimum in the July to September 2020 period. But, the number presently employed is still not as many as were employed prior to the Covid-19 downturn. Democrat policies make banks and other lenders unwilling to lend money to the oil and gas industry and their own investors have reason to exercise extra caution in pursuing only the most lucrative projects with supporting infrastructure already in place.</p><p>As for Putin and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, that effect is responsible for the spike on the gas price curve, but note that there appears to be a rapid price increase before and after that spike that seems to be based at least mostly on other factors in play prior to the Russian invasion.</p><p>The increase in gasoline and diesel fuel prices are deleterious for our entire economy. Add these to the high price increases in almost all goods and services, and many Americans are struggling to get by. Americans with low incomes are hurting the most. The Democrats say they care, but they do not care the least little bit. They are determined to pursue their expensive oil and gas price policies with an aim to murder the oil and gas industry, no matter how many Americans are hurt.</p><p>After all, they claim it is because carbon dioxide emissions by man are an existential threat to the planet. I have demolished that argument many times on this blog. Others have also shown the catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis to have failed in its scientific predictions. On the basis of the scientific method, this Democrat argument holds no water, but they cling to it as though it is a religion. It is a truth that people have chosen to annihilate millions of others due to their differing religions or lack thereof, so it is hardly surprising that Democrats of the catastrophic man-made global warming religion are very willing to do great harm to the standard of living of many, many of their fellow countrymen and of many in the developing world who desperately need the advantages of affordable oil and gas.</p><p>Those who hunger for ever-increasing power are willing to use that power brutally. The Democrats are demonstrating that general truism by driving up the cost of our goods and services while leaving our incomes behind the curve. This is just one more instance showing the foolishness of those many Americans deceived into believing the Democrats were the "kind" party. Constant expressions of caring about others are a sign that someone is trying very hard to pull the wool over the eyes of the naïve. This has been the one thing that Democrats have been very accomplished at doing. Dealing with reality is another thing entirely.</p><p><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-3665932773654619832022-05-03T21:44:00.002-05:002022-05-03T21:44:50.163-05:00The New York Times, Racism, and Tucker Carlson<p>Tucker Carlson often notes that Dr. Martin Luther King believed
that Black Americans should be judged by the content of their character, not by
the color of their skin. The <a href="https://spectator.org/the-new-york-times-tucker-carlson-hit-piece-exposes-the-papers-systemic-racism/">New
York Times responds</a> by claiming that Tucker Carlson’s show is the “most racist
program in the history of cable news.” </p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There is much more of interest in The American Spectator
article by Jeffrey Lord on the New York Times and its claims that Tucker
Carlson is a racist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Tucker once said
that the mass immigration of illegals made America poorer and dirtier.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course the immediate effect of the immigrants
lack of wealth and income was to make America poorer, but the dirtier comment
was especially met with howls of protest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yet, many
federal and state reports had previously noted that the illegal aliens had left
huge amounts of garbage behind them along our border areas and very extensive and
expensive clean-ups had been required over the years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Tucker had to explain this was what he was
alluding to, though it would have been better had he explained that
immediately. The New York Times made further attacks on Carlson, whose criticisms hit the sensitive nerve centers of the left so often.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Lord article makes many interesting observations about
The New York Times and racism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For the
record, the newspaper that claims to be the newspaper of the record, The New York
Times, is owned by a family whose wealth derived from the ownership of
slaves.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Adolph S. Ochs began his publishing career as owner of The
Chattanooga Times before he acquired The New York Times.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Several of his family members had fought for
the Confederacy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His mother had smuggled
medicine to the Confederate Army.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
1900, Ochs’ New York Times editorialized that the Democratic Party “may justly
insist that the evils of negro suffrage were wantonly inflicted on them.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Lord article notes that Ochs made many
contributions to the erection of Confederate memorials.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The New York Times has ever since been true to the
Democratic Party that embraced and fought for slavery for many decades and then
denied Black Americans the vote for many more decades.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To this day, The New York Times and the
Democratic Party tell us we ought to judge people by the color of their skin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They tell us that Black Americans cannot be
competitive in a merit-based society, so we must declare any appreciation of
merit to be racist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The logical
conclusion of their belief is that Black Americans should not even seek to
develop merit in their character.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They still
tell us it is racist to judge individuals by the content of their character, just
as they did historically.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Give them
credit for the consistency of their racism, even as you declare their beliefs terribly wrongheaded.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I look forward to the day when my granddaughters will be
judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That will not happen if The New York Times
and the Democratic Party have their way.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8959556.post-30298071937574005892022-05-02T23:25:00.002-05:002022-05-02T23:25:24.135-05:00The Soviets had their KGB, now we have our DGB<p><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">The Soviets had their KGB for security, now we have our DGB in the well-armed Department of Homeland Security. We are now all relieved of the effort to identify the truth. Government bureaucrats will do it for us. They call themselves authorities on the subject and we are supposed to believe them and become ignorant serfs. Their success as "Climate Change" authorities and as "Pandemic" authorities has paved the way for their general declaration of themselves as "Truth" authorities.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">All Hail to the Disinformation Governance Board. They tell us it is going to emphasize correcting information taken up in minority groups. This is a clear indication that the Democrat authoritarians are worried that they are losing the massive vote tallies they have long counted on from many minority groups. The mid-term elections cannot come soon enough if we are to maintain freedom of speech.</span></p>Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06941287709009945430noreply@blogger.com0