Skewed Climate Change reporting made right
Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions
In s 20 September 2019 Breitbart article, Nick Nolte lists 41 doomsday predictions that climate experts got wrong. Here are the first few.
For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.
In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent … and it never happened.
And not once — not even once! — have these alarmists had one of their predictions come true.
Think about that… the so-called experts are 0-41 with their predictions, but those of us who are skeptical of “expert” prediction number 42, the one that says that if we don’t immediately convert to socialism and allow Alexandria Ocasio-Crazy to control and organize our lives, the planet will become uninhabitable.
Why would any sane person listen to someone with a 0-41 record?
Why would we completely restructure our economy and sacrifice our personal freedom for “experts” who are 0-41, who have never once gotten it right?
LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG
Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.
- 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
- 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
- 1970: Ice Age By 2000
- 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
- 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
(Read more at Breitbart)
If they had the truth on their side, why wouldn’t they predict correctly
Rather, if they had the truth on their side and just knew that they could not predict, why not just withhold a prediction? Of course, the reason would be that the climate alarm activists want to gin up fear of impending doom that is just far enough away as to be actionable.
500 Scientists Write U.N.: ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’
Breitbart reported in a 24 September 2019 article how 500 scientists have signed a letter stating that no climate emergency exists.
More than 500 scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have sent a “European Climate Declaration” to the Secretary-General of the United Nations asking for a long-overdue, high-level, open debate on climate change.
Just as 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg addressed the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York accusing world leaders of robbing her of her future, scientists were begging the United Nations to keep hysteria from obscuring facts.
“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” the declaration states. “Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.”
The scientists underscored the importance of not rushing into enormously expensive climate action before fully ascertaining the facts.
“There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent,” they declared. “However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and bats, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.”
The signatories of the declaration also insist that public policy must respect scientific and economic realities and not just reflect the most fashionable frenzy of the day.
“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm,” they note. “We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”
“If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world,” they state.
Although Obama claimed the matter was settled, these 500 scientists dissent
When I worked at NASA as a technical writer/editor, I worked alongside subject matter experts that disagreed with the concept of global warming. At that time, I was also aware of a subject matter expert who supported the concept. Would you like to guess who the local media interviewed any time that the topic of “global warming” came to the forefront?
You would be correct if you wagered that the local media went to the subject matter expert who supported global warming.
“Beto: People can’t fight a Tyrannical Government nor do they have the right to”
A 26 September 2019 video posted by Colion Noir shows Evan MacDonald as he observes how the Second Amendment was constructed to allow the citizenry to stand against a tyranical and overreaching government. In response, Democrat presidential wanna-be Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke maintains that citizens cannot fight a tyranical government and do not have the right to fight that overreaching government.
On this count, O’Rourke is right that we cannot afford to buy the type of weapons the US Army carries. However, …
If we use the logic that Democrats most recently used to support their suggestion that American government (aka, taxpayers) must pay for healthcare for all, then you would be handing all sorts of high-powered, military-grade weapons and ammunition to the populace.
Many liberals might rightfully complain that some of these weapons might be used by criminals and the mentally ill. Truth of the matter is that they have and will. However, through the balancing power of good people with weapons, we would be able to fend off more criminals than if we were all disarmed.
Woman Who Confronted Beto O’Rourke Speaks Out, And She’s Got A Message For President Trump
In a 21 September 2019 Daily Caller article the forthrightness of Lauren Boebert comes to the fore.
Lauren Boebert, the Colorado restaurant owner who confronted Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke about his gun control proposals during a Thursday town hall, discussed the issue on Saturday morning’s “Fox & Friends.”
“I am here to say hell no, you’re not,” Boebert, who owns a pro-Second Amendment restaurant called Shooters Grill, told O’Rourke on Thursday. “I have four children. I’m 5 foot zero, 100 pounds, cannot defend myself with a fist. I want to know how you’re going to legislate that, because a criminal by defense breaks the law. So all you’re going to do is restrict law-abiding citizens like myself.”
In addition to discussing what led her to confront the presidential candidate, Boebert also had a few more words for O’Rourke along with a message for President Donald Trump.
“Well, I heard that Beto was coming to my state of Colorado to talk about gun control or maybe gun legislation, and I heard what he had to say about taking away our Second Amendment rights and our firearms,” Boebert said, responding to a question about why she decided to confront O’Rourke. “And I really wanted to go down there and just reverse his statement, and tell him absolutely not. Because I’m sure that that is every gun owning American’s immediate response to his ‘hell yes’ was an immediate, firm ‘hell no.’”
(Read more at the Daily Caller)
For more democracy, get involved
Ms. Boebert demonstrates a central idea within our democracy: to be heard, speak up early, speak up loudly, speak long enough to be heard, and (though not demonstrated in this article) keep speaking until you have spoken at the ballot box.
Then rinse and repeat.
Beto O’Rourke Widely Criticized Over His Gun Confiscation Answer During Reddit Q&A
The Daily Caller reports in a 20 September 2019 article on the boomerang-effect experienced by Democrat presidential wanna-be Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke.
Democratic 2020 hopeful Beto O’Rourke participated in an “Ask Me Anything” (AMA) on the popular link-sharing site Reddit Thursday, and his answer on gun confiscation was widely criticized.
In an AMA thread, users are encouraged to ask whatever questions they want in the comment section, and the creator of the thread can then choose what to answer. Reddit users can either up-vote or down-vote comment based on how well they contribute to the discussion.
O’Rourke’s AMA thread had over 26,000 comments as of Friday afternoon. Though Reddit’s users found some of O’Rourke’s answers satisfactory, he was strongly down-voted for his other answers.
“How will you confiscate the millions of AR 15s?” one user asked. The candidate has previously said that he plans to enact a mandatory gun confiscation program for AR-15s and AK-47s.
“Americans will comply with the law. It will be a mandatory buyback of AR-15 and AK-47s, weapons designed for war. Because we understand that theres no reason for a any of us to own a weapon that was designed to kill people on a battlefield. Especially when that kind of weapon is so often used to kill and terrorize people throughout this country — in their schools, in their grocery stores, in their churches, in their synagogues, at concerts… everywhere. I have met countless AR and AK owners who say they don’t need it to hunt, they don’t need it for self defense, it’s fun to shoot but would give it up. Because they also have kids and grandkids and want them to be safe.”
That answer received over 12,000 down-votes, and Reddit users deconstructed all the things wrong with his answer. One user gave a detailed response to O’Rourke’s question, asking him how he would find so many unregistered guns and how he would pay for the “buyback” program.
(Read more at the Daily Caller)
With both gun confiscation and impeachment, we need to show all Democrats how much we disagree
As with abortion, this does not work as a “meet our friends from the other side half-way” sort of situation. This is a “stand your ground” sort of situation. In fact, to the believer, I would quote (possibly not in full reference to the impeachment situation, but more to our charge to witness and protect):
Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm. (Ephesians 6:13 NASB)
The issue of the Ukraine
Congressional Democrats have no credibility on impeachment
The Federalist explains in a 27 September 2019 opinion piece how the problems with the most recent impeachment push will likely backfire on Democrats.
The problem with the Democrats’ impeachment gambit—aside from the fact that it appears to rest largely on a complaint riddled with inaccuracies, falsehoods, and hearsay—is that the American people don’t trust Congress and will likely have little confidence in any impeachment process undertaken by Democratic congressional leaders.
And no wonder. Ever since President Trump won the presidency in 2016, Democrats have been grasping for some pretext to invalidate the results of that election.
First, it was the outlandish claim that if Trump didn’t liquidate his global business interests upon taking office, he would be in violation of the emoluments clause. Then it was more than two years of the Russian collusion hoax that fizzled with the release of the Mueller report this spring. Along the way, there were repeated attempts to pin obstruction of justice on Trump for his firing of FBI director James Comey, as well as accusations about payments to Stormy Daniels, questions about Trump’s tax returns, and allegations of sexual assault.
None of this, in the minds of the vast majority of Americans, ever approached a justification for impeachment. A Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday found that just 37 percent support impeachment. A Monmouth poll last month showed just 35 percent support. For years, polls on impeachment have stayed in this range.
Democrats are therefore very far out of step with the American people on the question of impeachment, and it’s hard to see how the transcript of Trump’s conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, much less the “whistleblower” complaint released Wednesday evening, will change that. The complaint, with its allegation that Trump solicited interference in our elections from a foreign country, is in effect a continuation of the Russian collusion narrative Democrats spent two years pushing, to no avail.
In short, congressional Democrats don’t seem to appreciate how tenuous their position is now, or how a blatantly partisan impeachment inquiry could demolish all remaining confidence in our democratic institutions and set the country up for a crisis in the 2020 elections.
(Read more at The Federalist)
If the Democrats had the truth on their side, why would this be a parade of lies?
If Adam Schiff had the truth on his side, why did he lie into the Congressional record and then call it “parody” when other representatives call him out for making up testimony?
If the bureaucrats of the “deep state” had truth on their side, why change the forms associated with a whistleblower complaint so that second-hand information can be submitted? If they had truth on their side, why not allow the time-tested American justice system to play out and allow President Trump to face his accuser?
If Nancy Pelosi has the truth on her side, why does it seem that she had prior knowledge of a top-secret document within the White House? Is there a possibility that this “confidential informant” situation is a Democrat-devised scheme to remove President Trump from office?
Liz Cheney (@Liz_Cheney) September 30, 2019
If Schiff really believed that politicians who collaborated with other governments should be removed from office, why hasn’t he resigned after being caught on tape trying to get dirt on Trump from those who he thought were Ukrainian operatives?
Gutfeld on the media’s manipulation of the Ukraine story
In a video posted on 25 September 2019, Greg Gutfeld outlines the media’s manipulation of the Ukraine story.
Right now, the media’s face is pressed up against the window of the candy store and they’re salivating. The glass is fogging up. They are hoping against hope, staring into a field of dreams. Believing that, if they build an impeachment, a crime will follow.
So let’s step back and see this for what it is: another example of the media and the Democrats fashioning the worst of things out of the best of times all to avenge an emotional loss.
Do you want some examples?
- As America leads the way in climate with cleaner energy, Democrats tell our kids they have a decade to live.
- As race relations improve from the mass demonstrations of five years ago, the media sees racism in every nook.
- As men and women reach equality in all facets, the media questions whether gender is just a fantasy.
- As women and minorities gain more employment than ever, the man running the show is called a bigoted sexist.
A guy called Trump. A guy who wakes up every morning in that candy store called America wondering what we can get out of the world (and not the reverse).
Whistleblower Rules Secretly Changed Right Before Report Filed Against Trump
The Federalist Papers reports in a 28 September 2019 article that the Whistleblower law was secretly changed to allow second-hand information in a report against President Trump.
The Whistleblower Protection Act rules were changed in the months prior to a whistleblower coming forward against President Donald Trump.
The rules used to state that a whistleblower had to have direct, first hand knowledge of what they were reporting on.
But in the time between May 2018 and August 2019 that rule was changed, which has many wondering what involvement the intelligence community had in the complaint, The Federalist reported.
The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”
The internal properties of the newly revised “Disclosure of Urgent Concern” form, which the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) requires to be submitted under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA), show that the document was uploaded on September 24, 2019, at 4:25 p.m., just days before the anti-Trump complaint was declassified and released to the public. The markings on the document state that it was revised in August 2019, but no specific date of revision is disclosed.
(Read more at The Federalist Papers)
Thank God for those who work as watchmen on the wall
Thank God for the watchful eye of those at The Federalist and other true journalistic endeavors.
Good news not reported
Trump Shines Spotlight on Christians Being Killed, 1st President to Host UN Religious Freedom Meeting
The Christian Broadcast Network reports in a 24 September 2019 article how President Trump was the first American President to host a religious freedom meeting at the UN.
Donald Trump has become the first US President to ever host a meeting at the United Nations on religious freedom.
“As President, protecting religious freedom is one of my highest priorities,” Trump told the nations of the world on Monday.
In his keynote address to the UN, President Trump pointed to alarming statistics showing 80% of the world’s population lives in countries where religious liberty is threatened, restricted, or even banned.
“When I heard that number I said, ‘Please go back and check it because it can’t possibly be correct.’ And sadly it was 80%,” Trump said.
“America stands with believers in every country who ask only for the freedom to live according to the faith that is… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…—
The White House (@WhiteHouse) September 24, 2019
And followers of Christ are among the most heavily persecuted around the world. In fact, it’s estimated that 11 Christians die each day for their faith.
(Read more at the Christian Broadcast Network)
By shining light, many regimes will scramble
However, the light must be persistent.
Considering the cover provided by the American press, President Trump’s speech may have only transitory effects unless we support him with action and prayer.
Success of the Trump Economy Is Bad News for Democrats
Real Clear Politics addresses the big problem the great economy provides for the Democrats.
Presidential elections are won on the shoulders of a strong economy, which is why the voters are certain to reject the Democrat Party’s ongoing effort to promote radical economic change.
Out of all the Democrats running for president in 2020, none are acknowledging the significance of President Trump’s accomplishments on the daily lives of American families. Their push for dramatic changes to key pocketbook issues, including health care, taxes, and regulations, ignore a simple yet crucial political reality: American taxpayers are winning again.
The U.S. unemployment rate, for instance, is currently hovering near a 50-year low, after dropping by an entire percentage point since the president’s inauguration. More importantly, the ongoing economic resurgence is making the American Dream more accessible than ever before.
The U.S. economy has already added more than 6 million new jobs in just 2 ½ years, and employee compensation and savings are skyrocketing — clear indications that working Americans are experiencing the benefits of this booming economy.
Unfortunately for the Democrats, the American people are well aware of the tremendous economic progress this country has made under President Trump’s leadership, and they expect the good times to keep on rolling.
A recent poll from the Pew Research Center found that a whopping 71% of Americans “expect their personal finances to improve” over the course of the next year, while only 15% expect their finances to get worse. The lopsided result reveals a remarkable degree of confidence that this president’s pro-growth policies and “America First” trade agenda are responsible for our ongoing economic success, and that’s devastating news for the Democrats.
In order to have any chance at all against Donald Trump in the next presidential election, the Democrats will have to convince millions of voters that the ongoing economic renaissance isn’t real, which is only possible by brazenly lying to voters.
(Read more at Real Clear Politics)
That is, a good economy is bad news for the Democrats until …
The good economy is bad news for Democrats until conservatives and Republicans get complacent and leave it up to others to go to the polls. Moreover, when we do not push the middle-of-the-road people to vote, then we lose and the Democrats win.
Do you want the Democrats to win?
(Social) media giants exposed in their support of the left
Facebook Admits It’s a Publisher in Court Filings
A 10 September 2019 article at Breitbart shows how Facebook came to admit its role as a publisher (and the implications).
Facebook, in court filings defending itself from a lawsuit filed by activist and congressional candidate Laura Loomer, has cited its first amendment rights as a “publisher,” contradicting public claims by the company that its social media service is a platform.
The distinction between publisher and platform is central to the legal protections enjoyed by big tech companies, and is frequently cited by Republican lawmakers in their criticism of Silicon Valley’s political bias.
Under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, tech platforms have immunity from lawsuits arising out of their decisions to host (or not to to host) user-generated content. Unlike publishers, which are liable if their writers defame someone, a tech platform is not held liable for content created by its users.
Yet Facebook appears to be jettisoning this categorization in its court filings, saying it has a First Amendment right as a publisher not to carry Loomer’s content.
Via Facebook’s legal filings (p2):
Under well-established law, neither Facebook nor any other publisher can be liable for failing to publish someone else’s message.
This contradicts public statements made in a Senate hearing last year by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who insisted that Facebook is a platform and not a publisher.
(Read more at a href=”https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/09/18/facebook-admits-its-a-publisher-in-court-filings/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>Breitbart)
Since too many get their news from Google and Facebook, this is a threat
Both Facebook and Google must be broken up and brought to adhere to the laws applied to other publishers (that is, until they truly begin to provide an unbiased platform for all ideas). Admittedly, this will cause an opportunity for unsavory parts of the publishing community and it will require the watchfulness of parents and other protectors of the weak. However, to have the free speech right of all restored, it will be worth it.
Facebook incites violent war on ICE
OneNewsNow shows how Facebook incited people to attack ICE.
On Thursday, Sept. 19, Abolish ICE Denver and the Denver Communists are organizing a protest outside the house of Johnny Choate, the warden of the immigrant detention facility in Aurora, Colorado.
Abolish ICE thugs in Colorado want to see the homes and families of immigration enforcement officials set aflame.
Denver communists want alien detention facility employees dead, swinging from nooses with broken necks.
Both groups are brazenly using Facebook to spread their inflammatory and violent messages. So, where is Silicon Valley — whose top companies partner with the Southern Poverty Law Center smear machine to de-platform conservatives, pro-lifers and Donald Trump supporters — to stop the open borders left’s escalating hate?
On Thursday, Sept. 19, Abolish ICE Denver and the Denver Communists are organizing a protest outside the house of Johnny Choate, the warden of the immigrant detention facility in Aurora, Colorado. Choate works for GEO Group, which operates the center. Instead of laying blame at the feet of global profiteers who induce illegal immigrants to risk their families’ lives to trespass our borders, anti-ICE agitators are targeting homeland security employees and contractors who simply enforce federal immigration and detention laws passed by Congress.
The Denver Communists group shared a poster on Facebook with Choate’s face superimposed over a generic neighborhood map with private residential homes. “CONFRONT LA MIGRA WHERE THEY LIVE,” the radicals urged members. The graphic describes Choate as “warden of Aurora’s notorious ICE concentration camp.” That’s the same inflammatory and defamatory language popularized by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and used by antifa militant Willem Van Spronsen, who attempted to firebomb the Tacoma ICE facility, also run by GEO Group, in July.
The protest announcement also includes the phrase, “Chinga La Migra!” It’s the slogan of Mijente, a Latino activist group leading the Abolish ICE movement. Translation: “[Expletive] the Border Patrol.”
(Read more at OneNewsNow)
Facebook allows this type of incitement to stand. There should be consequences.
Just as we all have free speech, we also will face consequences if we choose to shout “Fire” at a crowded theater. In similar ways, there should be consequences for the Antifa thugs who called for action against our border agents and for Facebook, who provided a means of communicating.