The Importance of CO2

Ian Rutherford Plimer (born 12 February 1946) is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published many scientific papers, six books and is one of the co-editors of Encyclopedia of Geology. He has been an outspoken critic of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change.

How can they just ignore this?

The Cruelest Tax Of All

Watts Up With That? | Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

A “progressive” tax is one where the wealthier you are the higher percentage of tax you pay. On the other hand, I’ve said before that a tax on energy, the so-called “carbon tax”, is one of the most regressive taxes available. It is the reverse of progressive, it hits the poor the hardest. This is because poor people spend a larger percentage of their income on energy than do rich people.
Someone challenged me on this claim about energy taxes the other day, and I realized I believed it without ever checking it … bad Willis, no cookies. So of course, having had that thought I had to take a look.

Continue to article…

stupid confirmation questions

Here are the top ten such questions, all of which occurred during the hearings for attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions, CIA director nominee Mike Pompeo, and secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson.

1. “Given that you did not disclose a number of those awards,” Connecticut senator Richard Blumenthal asked Sessions, “are there any other awards from groups that have similar kinds of ideological negative views of immigrants or of African-Americans or Muslims or others, including awards that you may have received from the Ku Klux Klan?”

2. “During our meeting you expressed support for a carbon tax as one preferred measure to address issues of climate change,” New Mexico senator Tom Udall said to Tillerson. “Will you continue to work with the Congress on this complex issue, and to make this a priority in the State Department if you are confirmed?” Tillerson quickly responded, “When it gets to tax policy, that’s going to be the responsibility of other agencies to conduct.”

3. California senator Kamala Harris questioned Pompeo about his personal stance on gay rights. “Your voting record and stated position on gay marriage and the importance of having a traditional family structure for raising children is pretty clear,” Harris said. “Can you commit to me that your personal views on this issue will remain your personal views and will not impact internal policies that you put in place at the CIA?”

4. “In the past, you have questioned the scientific consensus on climate change,” Harris said to Pompeo, citing research statistics from NASA. “Do you have any reason to doubt NASA’s findings?” Pompeo quickly responded, “As the director of CIA, I would prefer today to not get into the details of climate debate and science.”

5. “The next attorney general must bring hope and healing to this country,” New Jersey senator Cory Booker said in his testimony against Sessions. “This demands a more courageous empathy than his record demonstrates.” Rather than ask the nominee questions, Booker chose to give an impassioned speech about the attorney general’s role in healing the country. The attorney general’s job is not to heal the country or “bring hope”; it’s to uphold the rule of law.

6. “Please give us those assurances that you will guarantee that the state department will be the leader as it has been in advancing a climate agenda for our country,” Massachusetts senator Ed Markey said to Tillerson. Tillerson is nominated to head the state department, not the Environmental Protection Agency.

7. “I’m asking you whether those allegations about ExxonMobil’s knowledge of climate science and decision to fund and promote a view contrary to its awareness of science whether those allegations are true or false,” Virginia senator Tim Kaine said to Tillerson while asking about ExxonMobil’s climate-change positions rather than what Tillerson would do as secretary of state. When Tillerson refused to answer, Kaine asked, “Do you lack the knowledge to answer my question or are you refusing to answer my question?” “A little of both,” Tillerson retorted.

8. New Hampshire senator Jeanne Shaheen asked Tillerson, “In your view, is it helpful to suggest that as Americans we should be afraid of Muslims?”

Shaheen also asked two out-of-context questions relating to women’s issues:

9. “Will you pledge to continue to prioritize quality family planning and reproductive health services for women worldwide and ensure that resources and access to these programs are not conflated with support for abortion?”

10. “Can I ask whether you agree that we should continue that initiative, to empower women, and what steps you would take to ensure that the state department and USAID continue to fund necessary programs to address global women’s issues?” Shaheen followed up with Tillerson.

When most, if not all, of Trump’s cabinet nominees are confirmed by the Senate, Democratic senators will be quick to blame Republicans. Maybe they should have asked more relevant questions.

Source: Trump Cabinet Nominees' Senate Confirmation Hearings — Ten Most Bizarre Questions | National Review

Reinventing Van Jones


Van Jones, Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Ent...“I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28, and then the verdicts came down on April 29,” he told the East Bay Express. “By August, I was a communist.”
— Van Jones


Van Jones, a self-avowed Communist was initailly tasked as Obama’s Green Jobs Czar talks about the means to accomplish the redistribution of wealth through Eco-Capitalism.

As in the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:
“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,”

And again here, is Ms. Camille Risler, a representative of the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD) which is an organization listed as an official consultant to the United Nations Economic and Social Council at the United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Paris, stated that the cause of Climate Change is the unequal distribution of wealth, carbon, and power.

The “green” movement was a perfect vehicle as it remains to this day for Van Jones to realize his socialistic vision but when his background made news and his views were publicly exposed the Obama administration was forced to terminate him.

A lifelong far-left conspiracy theorist now poses as the voice of reason.

Before he was pontificating on CNN airwaves, he was a top environmental official of the Obama administration. The special adviser for green jobs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality held a special place in Obama senior

advisor Valerie Jarrett’s heart. The Chicago power broker took full credit at a fringe Daily Kos blogger conference for recruiting him and closely following his career.

Source: Van Jones: CNN Radical Is a Faker | National Review

“I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28, and then the verdicts came down on April 29,” he told the East Bay Express. “By August, I was a communist.” — Van Jones
How Could Obama Have Hired Van Jones? via Real Clear Politics

Conservative vs Progressive intellectual processes

English: A photo of The Thinker by Rodin locat...How conservatives out-intellectualized progressives

December 6, 2016

The vital center is imploding throughout the Western world. Liberal norms and institutions face a greater challenge than at any time since the end of the Second World War. And so defenders of the liberal order seek, often desperately, to remind themselves of what principles they stand for and the premises that underlie their deepest political and moral convictions.

That’s what I take Molly Worthen to be doing in her recent, admirable essay in The New York Times. Worthen writes as a liberal who admires the way the American right has built an infrastructure of programs and institutes where young conservatives receive instruction in the history of political philosophy from Aristotle and Xenophon on down to James Madison, Adam Smith, and beyond.

Worthen thinks liberals should do something similar:

Liberals have their own activist workshops and reading groups, but these rarely instruct students in an intellectual tradition, a centuries-long canon… [Great Books] are powerful tools for preparing the next generation of activists to succeed in the bewildering ideological landscape of the country that just elected Mr. Trump. [ The New York Times ]

Source: How conservative

s out-intellectualized progressives

the fallacy and dangerd of hate speech

Hate speech. It’s a buzz phrase you’ve likely had lobbed at you whenever you’ve said something a liberal finds displeasing. He/she/ze will also label you a hater. Your crime? Doesn’t matter. You said something offensive, how dare you . But doesn’t the First Amendment protect all speech you ask? Of course. That’s the problem leftists have with the First Amendment…

Do not allow anyone to separate “hate speech” from “free speech.” It’s a trap.

Here’s what our Founding Fathers had to say about speech which some might find bothersome:

Source: DEBUNKED: Why ‘Hate Speech’ Actually Doesn’t Exist

Obama’s Unrelenting Folly

Obama Links Jihad To Global Warming And Second Amendment

December 6, 2016

President Barack Obama linked “climate change” and the Second Amendment to the threat of Islamic terrorism – which he described as “violent extremism” – during a Tuesday address at Macdill Air Force Base in Tampa, FL.

Obama claimed that Islamic terrorism was partly driven by food and water scarcity brought about by anthropogenic global warming. “A changing climate is increasing competition for food and water,” he said of Syria and other Muslim-majority and conflict-ridden failed states.

Source: Obama Links Jihad To Global Warming And Second Amendment | Daily Wire

The Awaiting Foreign Mess

The American Thinker in this article outlines three of the most critical problems facing the next president. Each of these could result in global chaos if not war.

The thing that is so striking to me is that it was Hillary Clinton’s State Department working in tandem with the administration whose policies gave rise to each of these ”messes”.

How would it make sense to elect someone whose decisions lead us to this point? How could any sane person trust that person’s judgment going forward?

The Foreign Mess Awaiting the Next President

Whoever inherits Obama’s mantle will have to face three rising security threats if democracy is to maintain in the United States in the long run.

Read the full article…

…lifting the fog

WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By :