We didn’t have a single political comment yesterday. So, to start off the day, I’m reposting something I put on the Daily Thread last evening:
From Lifenews.com:
Where is Michelle Obama’s Hashtag for Meriam Ibrahim? She’s Pregnant and Sentenced to Die.
She is married to an American citizen and I think her child will be an American citizen. But they will take it and raise it Muslim. Obama will do nothing about this. But She won’t be executed for two years and we may have a real man in office by then.
What is wrong with killing someone who leaves Islam? I guess Muslims don’t have enough faith in their god to allow Allah to judge and reward or punish.
Remember, if your father was a Muslim than you are a Muslim.
This from The Washington Times, by Tammy Bruce.
Politico reports the Pentagon has approved convicted traitor Bradley Manning for transfer from prison at Fort Levenworth, Kan. To civilian prison so he can receive “gender treatment”. Manning convicted of sending classified document to WikiLeaks, has changed his name to “Chelsea” wants hormone therapy and other medical treatment so he can realize his true self. Or something.
This was written in the context of the VA hospital scandal.
Given the baby is automatically a US citizen, this may be a way out for Sudan to grant clemency while still appearing Islamic. Lets hope they take it. Mohammed always struck me an excellent plagiarist – copying elements of the older monotheist religions he added elements — more ritual, more militancy — that ensured it would survive longer than many personality cults. Not sure if he did this on purpose but it did work.
Ricky — that is Putin’s vision. The US has been countering this for awhile with little success Bases in the “stans” have largely disappeared and were ineffectual anyway. Boots on the ground mean little in today’s world without economic integration. Georgia was a complete debacle which the Georgians are to blame more than the Bush admin which looked like it was caught unawares. In the Ukraine, Putin has what he wants; the security of the Crimean naval base. I’m quite sure the eastern Russian-Ukrainian nationalist were merely used and will now be left stranded. Putin can’t afford to support the rust belt that is the eastern Ukraine. When Iran and North Korea regimes finally undergo a radical change we will see the next direct encounter. The West has the edge in Korea but its a coin toss in Iran. The Americans have “boots” surrounding Iran but economic integration belongs to Eurasia. American’s dependency on the military industrial complex may be its downfall as oppose to its strength.
Great Britain was (on the whole) devoutly Christian during the 19th century and it led the world during that century. Great Britain turned away from God and it became weak.
The US was (on the whole) devoutly Christian during the 20th century and it led the world during that century. The US turned away from God and it has become weak.
Asia is turning toward God. It will lead the world during the next century. Putin is temporary. The Russian people support his stands against perversion and obscenity. That is what impresses me.
When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, they attacked a nation that was militarily weak, but spiritually strong. They made a huge mistake. All of the major institutions of the US are now becoming rotten to the core. The military was one of the last to be corrupted, but it too is now becoming atheist and perverted.
God is on our side is an old refrain. God is on the winning side is nearly as old. When Germany and the UK clashed in the 20th century they both thought God was on their side. However, empires rise and fall without (the Christian) God — Aztecs, Incas, Assyrians, Turks, Persian, Mughal, various Chinese empires, and on and on. Although, you could make case for the moral decline leading the economic/military decline. This is a very traditional argument. A more modern twist on the same basis is environmental destruction. When trying to find a common cause for the decline of empires, writer are left with broad moral arguments not specific material conditions. To be specific is to run into a danger of contradiction but looking at the US an over-reliance of the military class coupled with an uninvolved populace isn’t much different than Rome and other empires. The EU and possibly Eurasia are economic projects first of all and prefer to use “soft power” rather than be tied to a possibly over-influential military.
The question is never whether God is on a nation’s side. The question is whether a nation is following God. When a nation stops following God, it will become weak. When a nation’s sinfulness reaches a certain point, it is marked for destruction whether the nation is the Canaanites, Babylon, Israel, the Aztecs, Nazi Germany or the United States.
Emily posted one of those “posters” on Facebook that asks,
“Which is more likely?
“Regional Environmental Groups & Community Activists
Are spending their limited operating budgets
In a massive conspiracy with 90% of the global scientific community
To create a hoax & ruin the economy.
(Or…)
“Oil Companies
Are spending their obscene profits
To bribe anyone they can
To protect their profits & limit any future liability their pollution might cause.”
I know there is an answer to this, but I’ve only been following the issue casually. If anyone has a good reply to this, or an article that can explain it well, I’d appreciate the help. Thanks!
Karen, There is a third explanation. Environmentalism is a religion. It is a cult much like Scientology. It has its villains: the oil companies, corporations, etc. It has its priests such as Al Gore. As in Scientology, there are a few people who are becoming very wealthy through the cult. However, unlike Scientology which bilks cult members out of money, environmentalism uses government to take money from consumers and taxpayers to funnel to Gore and friends through projects like Solyndra.
As for “the global scientific community”, that group is completely cowed by political pressure. In the past generation they have just “discovered” that humans are warming the earth, that all perverts were born that way, and that millions of undisciplined children actually have a disease and should be drugged.
Karen, I don’t have a direct answer to that although I think the global warming movement has become cult-like and politically driven. And when that happens, people spend all kinds of crazy money in crazy ways. 🙂 It’s become “a cause” to push and to celebrate, and I think that is a much deeper motivation that profits.
Check out the Cornwall Alliance, they have written a lot about global warming and the “alarmist” wing that has taken over the discussion of climate change (climate change has always been a fact, there’s simply nothing new there — what’s new this time is that the alarm is coming from ‘projections’ using ‘models’ that basically make predictions into the future; sorry, but that’s not really science anymore, if you’re not observing it; you’re taking a guess at what will happen in the distant future; models may be very faulty).
Here’s an interesting politico piece, I agree with some of it but not all. I do think when it comes to social issues (gay marriage especially, but also on immigration) the GOP is becoming more of a minority and that could be a problem within the party internally and in national elections.
There is definitely a ‘religious’ fervor to it all.
I remember covering an event maybe a year ago when Gore came to LA and was scheduled to address students at one of our high schools. For some reason he couldn’t make the 20-mile drive from his hotel and so they ushered all the kids into the historic downtown movie theater to watch gore in a “live feed” hooked up via Internet.
So after some warmup entertainment (folk songs, of course), here comes a gigantic Gore (head only) onto the screen urging the students to carry on in the cause. It was all extremely “big brother” is-addressing-you, quite bizarre really.
It may be too complicated to follow easily, but I’ll give it a go.
Some climate scientists have made computer climate models to predict the future. These models show catastrophic climate change coming. The oceans will rise and life as we know it will change completely.
There is just one problem; when these models have past weather plugged into them their predictions don’t come anywhere near what happened afterwards. They don’t work.
Scientists are no more honest or truthful than you or I. Scientists make just as many mistakes. They have foolish notions. They are just as greedy. And because many are so much smarter than the rest of us, they can have the same attitudes as Bullwinkle J. Moose aka “Mr. Know-It-All.”
As I recall gore’s message from that day in the theater, it was very “evangelical” in nature — telling students it was up to them to go out and spread the word and let people know what’s coming and how important it is now to change their ways.
The kids, a captive audience, of course, seemed eager to get on board — included were pins and ribbons handed out to wear.
Many political and social movements have an evangelical quality to them especially in the US. As an outsider looking in, I’m always struck by the rah rah nature of US movements. Environmentalism is no different. But separate environmentalism from the actual science. The science behind climate change is solid and somber. There’s no doubt that climate is changing, the change is more rapid, and its man made. This is observational data. Projections on the other hand are far more tricky and rely on models and computer simulations.
As the internet meme suggests its far more likely that fossil fuel interests supported science (the 10%) is created to sow doubt and confusion whereas there is no great conspiracy among the unaffiliated scientists.
Re: Karen’s 9:03
There’s a fallacy is the original thesis of the argument.
First, I agree with what Ricky and the others say concerning their motivation.
But the fallacy is that there are people spending their life savings (I know that isn’t what it says, but they want us to think that.) trying to save the planet.
Just the opposite: There’s money in “global warming”. I’ve said a dozen times before, when I was your age, it was “The coming ice age”. The problem with that is there is no money in it. Many of the scientists who are on the global warming bandwagon are intellectual prostitutes. They know there is no research money to prove a stable climate. The opposition to the oil pipeline is to keep the oil trains running from Canada. Obama uses more gas and creates more CO2 warming up his plane than my car does in its lifetime. AlGore uses more energy keeping his swimming pools warm than I do all winter.
They are all either:
1. Hypocrites, and devious liars.
2. Intellectual prostitutes
3. Naive followers of the “in” coming disaster.
I haven’t met an intelligent person yet who believes that mankind can influence the climate.
A lot can be learned from observing the people who are preaching “climate change”.
The presence of money doesn’t disprove a theory. There’s alot of money in religion, right wing punditry, climate change denial, etc. Money may explain a theory or beliefs’ resilience but not its truth. Nor does the hypocrisy of some disprove an idea or politicians would be vacant of any ideas.
the data is conclusive — climate is changing, and changing at a quicker rate than previous climate changes. The greenhouse effect has been replicated, proven, and accepted as fact. CO2 emissions have increased. CO2 does increase the greenhouse effect. Increased greenhouse effect has been linked to climate change. Simple. Even climate change deniers concede most of the above. Their arguments usually center on the origins of CO2 (to what extent is human activity responsible) or to the extent that this climate change is different than previous climate changes.
HRW Those are computer models they are using. There are enough “deniers” with valid credentials to dispute all their findings. At work we used to have a saying, GI-GO. Garbage in -Garbage out. There is not enough data in this to make any reliable projections.
Though I don’t retract my categories, I firmly believe them. I hope you don’t take it personally. I always read, and respect your comments. Though I usually disagree.
” … Global warming alarmism is not science. It is, rather, an industry fueled by billions of dollars that the world’s political class showers on climate ‘scientists’ to compensate them for producing silly projections of doom. … Money talks, but it doesn’t necessarily produce good science.”
When climate change was first proposed (global warming then), there were more skeptics than now. There’s been a gradual inlcination to this position until it has become today the established paradigm. The majority outside the paradigm are funded privately by mostly fossil fuel interests — they are also paid better than scientist working on gov’t grants or at land grant university. If I accept your (Chas) earlier assertion, this would place their opinion under suspicion.
There’s an interesting proposition of how deniers have changed over time. Initially they denied there was warming, when data became irrefutable. They pointed to the medieval warming period and said the warming was cyclical. When the warming period continued and went past the medieval temperature range, deniers went further back and claimed there was a 100,000 year cyclical temperature change. Why the need to tie climate change to natural cycles? To avoid tying man made CO2 production to climate change. CO2 production is of course due to fossil fuel consumption. Following the money implicates the deniers more than the proponents.
Note the dispute is not whether global warming is real. The data indicates it is; the deniers dispute its caused by man-made CO2 production.
HRW, There has been no warming for 15 years. This is one of the reasons we are entering The Emperor’s New Clothes phase of the whole global warming farce. The greenies are becoming more shrill and alarmist with no recent facts to support their cause. I hate the higher taxes and utility bills, but I do find the farce to be entertaining.
Ricky — a quick goggle search tells me that the 2000’s have been the warmest decade on record. Goggle images gives me a plethora of graphs which confirm it. The 15 year idea is probably due to 1998 being warmest year on record but in terms of ten or five year averages the 21st century is warmer and still warming.
Donna — alarmism is everywhere and common to every cause.
Today, I will remember my thirteen Confederate ancestors who were in that Band of Brothers who fought for Southern Rights when their states were invaded.
Wandering Views 
We didn’t have a single political comment yesterday. So, to start off the day, I’m reposting something I put on the Daily Thread last evening:
From Lifenews.com:
Where is Michelle Obama’s Hashtag for Meriam Ibrahim? She’s Pregnant and Sentenced to Die.
She is married to an American citizen and I think her child will be an American citizen. But they will take it and raise it Muslim. Obama will do nothing about this. But She won’t be executed for two years and we may have a real man in office by then.
LikeLike
Barack Obama “Like a Boss!”
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/like-a-boss-huh.php
LikeLike
What is wrong with killing someone who leaves Islam? I guess Muslims don’t have enough faith in their god to allow Allah to judge and reward or punish.
Remember, if your father was a Muslim than you are a Muslim.
LikeLike
Don’t you hate it when you spell a simple word wrong? Than should be then.
LikeLike
We knew what you mean, Bob.
This from The Washington Times, by Tammy Bruce.
Politico reports the Pentagon has approved convicted traitor Bradley Manning for transfer from prison at Fort Levenworth, Kan. To civilian prison so he can receive “gender treatment”. Manning convicted of sending classified document to WikiLeaks, has changed his name to “Chelsea” wants hormone therapy and other medical treatment so he can realize his true self. Or something.
This was written in the context of the VA hospital scandal.
LikeLike
The weakness and perversion of Western Europe and most of the US makes them less and less important.
This is the future:
http://rt.com/business/161284-china-russia-economic-zone/
LikeLike
I thought this was interesting;
http://www.salon.com/2014/05/22/get_a_clue_mcdonalds_why_its_business_model_has_utterly_failed/
Given the baby is automatically a US citizen, this may be a way out for Sudan to grant clemency while still appearing Islamic. Lets hope they take it. Mohammed always struck me an excellent plagiarist – copying elements of the older monotheist religions he added elements — more ritual, more militancy — that ensured it would survive longer than many personality cults. Not sure if he did this on purpose but it did work.
Ricky — that is Putin’s vision. The US has been countering this for awhile with little success Bases in the “stans” have largely disappeared and were ineffectual anyway. Boots on the ground mean little in today’s world without economic integration. Georgia was a complete debacle which the Georgians are to blame more than the Bush admin which looked like it was caught unawares. In the Ukraine, Putin has what he wants; the security of the Crimean naval base. I’m quite sure the eastern Russian-Ukrainian nationalist were merely used and will now be left stranded. Putin can’t afford to support the rust belt that is the eastern Ukraine. When Iran and North Korea regimes finally undergo a radical change we will see the next direct encounter. The West has the edge in Korea but its a coin toss in Iran. The Americans have “boots” surrounding Iran but economic integration belongs to Eurasia. American’s dependency on the military industrial complex may be its downfall as oppose to its strength.
LikeLike
Great Britain was (on the whole) devoutly Christian during the 19th century and it led the world during that century. Great Britain turned away from God and it became weak.
The US was (on the whole) devoutly Christian during the 20th century and it led the world during that century. The US turned away from God and it has become weak.
Asia is turning toward God. It will lead the world during the next century. Putin is temporary. The Russian people support his stands against perversion and obscenity. That is what impresses me.
LikeLike
When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, they attacked a nation that was militarily weak, but spiritually strong. They made a huge mistake. All of the major institutions of the US are now becoming rotten to the core. The military was one of the last to be corrupted, but it too is now becoming atheist and perverted.
LikeLike
God is on our side is an old refrain. God is on the winning side is nearly as old. When Germany and the UK clashed in the 20th century they both thought God was on their side. However, empires rise and fall without (the Christian) God — Aztecs, Incas, Assyrians, Turks, Persian, Mughal, various Chinese empires, and on and on. Although, you could make case for the moral decline leading the economic/military decline. This is a very traditional argument. A more modern twist on the same basis is environmental destruction. When trying to find a common cause for the decline of empires, writer are left with broad moral arguments not specific material conditions. To be specific is to run into a danger of contradiction but looking at the US an over-reliance of the military class coupled with an uninvolved populace isn’t much different than Rome and other empires. The EU and possibly Eurasia are economic projects first of all and prefer to use “soft power” rather than be tied to a possibly over-influential military.
LikeLike
The question is never whether God is on a nation’s side. The question is whether a nation is following God. When a nation stops following God, it will become weak. When a nation’s sinfulness reaches a certain point, it is marked for destruction whether the nation is the Canaanites, Babylon, Israel, the Aztecs, Nazi Germany or the United States.
LikeLike
Sad, but true, Ricky
LikeLike
Hoping for a little help in explaining something…
Emily posted one of those “posters” on Facebook that asks,
“Which is more likely?
“Regional Environmental Groups & Community Activists
Are spending their limited operating budgets
In a massive conspiracy with 90% of the global scientific community
To create a hoax & ruin the economy.
(Or…)
“Oil Companies
Are spending their obscene profits
To bribe anyone they can
To protect their profits & limit any future liability their pollution might cause.”
I know there is an answer to this, but I’ve only been following the issue casually. If anyone has a good reply to this, or an article that can explain it well, I’d appreciate the help. Thanks!
LikeLike
Karen, There is a third explanation. Environmentalism is a religion. It is a cult much like Scientology. It has its villains: the oil companies, corporations, etc. It has its priests such as Al Gore. As in Scientology, there are a few people who are becoming very wealthy through the cult. However, unlike Scientology which bilks cult members out of money, environmentalism uses government to take money from consumers and taxpayers to funnel to Gore and friends through projects like Solyndra.
As for “the global scientific community”, that group is completely cowed by political pressure. In the past generation they have just “discovered” that humans are warming the earth, that all perverts were born that way, and that millions of undisciplined children actually have a disease and should be drugged.
LikeLike
Karen, I don’t have a direct answer to that although I think the global warming movement has become cult-like and politically driven. And when that happens, people spend all kinds of crazy money in crazy ways. 🙂 It’s become “a cause” to push and to celebrate, and I think that is a much deeper motivation that profits.
Check out the Cornwall Alliance, they have written a lot about global warming and the “alarmist” wing that has taken over the discussion of climate change (climate change has always been a fact, there’s simply nothing new there — what’s new this time is that the alarm is coming from ‘projections’ using ‘models’ that basically make predictions into the future; sorry, but that’s not really science anymore, if you’re not observing it; you’re taking a guess at what will happen in the distant future; models may be very faulty).
http://www.cornwallalliance.org/blog/
Here’s an interesting politico piece, I agree with some of it but not all. I do think when it comes to social issues (gay marriage especially, but also on immigration) the GOP is becoming more of a minority and that could be a problem within the party internally and in national elections.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/how-republicans-lose-by-winning-106961.html
LikeLike
Ah, Ricky and I cross-posted.
LikeLike
There is definitely a ‘religious’ fervor to it all.
I remember covering an event maybe a year ago when Gore came to LA and was scheduled to address students at one of our high schools. For some reason he couldn’t make the 20-mile drive from his hotel and so they ushered all the kids into the historic downtown movie theater to watch gore in a “live feed” hooked up via Internet.
So after some warmup entertainment (folk songs, of course), here comes a gigantic Gore (head only) onto the screen urging the students to carry on in the cause. It was all extremely “big brother” is-addressing-you, quite bizarre really.
LikeLike
And there are major, BIG dollars being spent on all this that I suspect easily rival (if not top) business profits.
LikeLike
Karen, here is an answer.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/why-global-warming-alarmism-isnt-science-2.php
It may be too complicated to follow easily, but I’ll give it a go.
Some climate scientists have made computer climate models to predict the future. These models show catastrophic climate change coming. The oceans will rise and life as we know it will change completely.
There is just one problem; when these models have past weather plugged into them their predictions don’t come anywhere near what happened afterwards. They don’t work.
Scientists are no more honest or truthful than you or I. Scientists make just as many mistakes. They have foolish notions. They are just as greedy. And because many are so much smarter than the rest of us, they can have the same attitudes as Bullwinkle J. Moose aka “Mr. Know-It-All.”
LikeLike
As I recall gore’s message from that day in the theater, it was very “evangelical” in nature — telling students it was up to them to go out and spread the word and let people know what’s coming and how important it is now to change their ways.
The kids, a captive audience, of course, seemed eager to get on board — included were pins and ribbons handed out to wear.
LikeLike
Many political and social movements have an evangelical quality to them especially in the US. As an outsider looking in, I’m always struck by the rah rah nature of US movements. Environmentalism is no different. But separate environmentalism from the actual science. The science behind climate change is solid and somber. There’s no doubt that climate is changing, the change is more rapid, and its man made. This is observational data. Projections on the other hand are far more tricky and rely on models and computer simulations.
As the internet meme suggests its far more likely that fossil fuel interests supported science (the 10%) is created to sow doubt and confusion whereas there is no great conspiracy among the unaffiliated scientists.
LikeLike
Any scientist who questions global warming is branded as a “heretic”, excluded professionally and shunned.
LikeLike
Re: Karen’s 9:03
There’s a fallacy is the original thesis of the argument.
First, I agree with what Ricky and the others say concerning their motivation.
But the fallacy is that there are people spending their life savings (I know that isn’t what it says, but they want us to think that.) trying to save the planet.
Just the opposite: There’s money in “global warming”. I’ve said a dozen times before, when I was your age, it was “The coming ice age”. The problem with that is there is no money in it. Many of the scientists who are on the global warming bandwagon are intellectual prostitutes. They know there is no research money to prove a stable climate. The opposition to the oil pipeline is to keep the oil trains running from Canada. Obama uses more gas and creates more CO2 warming up his plane than my car does in its lifetime. AlGore uses more energy keeping his swimming pools warm than I do all winter.
They are all either:
1. Hypocrites, and devious liars.
2. Intellectual prostitutes
3. Naive followers of the “in” coming disaster.
I haven’t met an intelligent person yet who believes that mankind can influence the climate.
A lot can be learned from observing the people who are preaching “climate change”.
LikeLike
Chas — you’ve met me, sort of
The presence of money doesn’t disprove a theory. There’s alot of money in religion, right wing punditry, climate change denial, etc. Money may explain a theory or beliefs’ resilience but not its truth. Nor does the hypocrisy of some disprove an idea or politicians would be vacant of any ideas.
the data is conclusive — climate is changing, and changing at a quicker rate than previous climate changes. The greenhouse effect has been replicated, proven, and accepted as fact. CO2 emissions have increased. CO2 does increase the greenhouse effect. Increased greenhouse effect has been linked to climate change. Simple. Even climate change deniers concede most of the above. Their arguments usually center on the origins of CO2 (to what extent is human activity responsible) or to the extent that this climate change is different than previous climate changes.
LikeLike
HRW Those are computer models they are using. There are enough “deniers” with valid credentials to dispute all their findings. At work we used to have a saying, GI-GO. Garbage in -Garbage out. There is not enough data in this to make any reliable projections.
Though I don’t retract my categories, I firmly believe them. I hope you don’t take it personally. I always read, and respect your comments. Though I usually disagree.
LikeLike
From Bob’s earlier power line link:
” … Global warming alarmism is not science. It is, rather, an industry fueled by billions of dollars that the world’s political class showers on climate ‘scientists’ to compensate them for producing silly projections of doom. … Money talks, but it doesn’t necessarily produce good science.”
LikeLike
When climate change was first proposed (global warming then), there were more skeptics than now. There’s been a gradual inlcination to this position until it has become today the established paradigm. The majority outside the paradigm are funded privately by mostly fossil fuel interests — they are also paid better than scientist working on gov’t grants or at land grant university. If I accept your (Chas) earlier assertion, this would place their opinion under suspicion.
There’s an interesting proposition of how deniers have changed over time. Initially they denied there was warming, when data became irrefutable. They pointed to the medieval warming period and said the warming was cyclical. When the warming period continued and went past the medieval temperature range, deniers went further back and claimed there was a 100,000 year cyclical temperature change. Why the need to tie climate change to natural cycles? To avoid tying man made CO2 production to climate change. CO2 production is of course due to fossil fuel consumption. Following the money implicates the deniers more than the proponents.
Note the dispute is not whether global warming is real. The data indicates it is; the deniers dispute its caused by man-made CO2 production.
LikeLike
HRW, There has been no warming for 15 years. This is one of the reasons we are entering The Emperor’s New Clothes phase of the whole global warming farce. The greenies are becoming more shrill and alarmist with no recent facts to support their cause. I hate the higher taxes and utility bills, but I do find the farce to be entertaining.
LikeLike
It’s the alarmism that’s become simply over the top.
LikeLike
Ricky — a quick goggle search tells me that the 2000’s have been the warmest decade on record. Goggle images gives me a plethora of graphs which confirm it. The 15 year idea is probably due to 1998 being warmest year on record but in terms of ten or five year averages the 21st century is warmer and still warming.
Donna — alarmism is everywhere and common to every cause.
LikeLike
But this is supposed to be science, remember? 😉
LikeLike
Thanks, everyone!
LikeLike
It was our pleasure, Karen, and don’t build that year-round golf resort in Alaska just yet.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickmichaels/2011/07/15/why-hasnt-the-earth-warmed-in-nearly-15-years/
LikeLike
hwesseli,
Did you look at my article?
LikeLike
A good article, Bob.
Today, I will remember my thirteen Confederate ancestors who were in that Band of Brothers who fought for Southern Rights when their states were invaded.
http://youtu.be/So-5rfyjIzI
LikeLike