A prediction for November 4th

The Republicans will fall short of taking control of the Senate. Reason will be that the base is disenchanted with Republican establishment for pushing amnesty for illegals and conducting a war against the Tea Party.

Also, this: What does the current Republican party stand for? What is their plan? Do you know? Nope, neither does anyone else. Neither do they. If they stood for something they would have told us, wouldn’t they?

Kansas and North Carolina looking like losers, and others shaky as well. They had an opportunity of a lifetime and they blew it. Stupid party stays stupid.

Democrats way outspending Republicans. Republican ads are few and boring. Republican fund raising down because they’ve pissed off their small donors to hang on to the large donors. Guess what? Large donors not enough to cover the loss.

One bright spot is Colorado where Cory Gardner is holding up well against vicious attacks by Udall.

This is really too bad. Harry Reid will stay in power not because of anything he or the Democrats have done to deserve it, but because Republicans are wimps and won’t stand up and fight back. If only they had listened to Senator Jeff Sessions, this coming catastrophe could have been avoided. Instead, they listened to their political advisors who told them to just sit back and be quiet. That’s what George W. Bush did, and it got him the lowest approval numbers of any president since Nixon. That’s what got the country soaked in liberalism.

There’s going to be at least one new Supreme Court justice in the next two years, perhaps two. They are going to be liberals bent on tearing the U.S. Constitution apart and burning it. We can thank Republicans for it. Liberals are just doing what they do when there’s no effective opposition.

ECO Exaggeration is the Hallmark of Environmentalism

Remember the global cooling scare from the 1970s? Here’s Newsweek on April 28, 1975:

The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”

Here is an extensive compilation of news and magazine articles from the 1970s predicting a coming ice age.

This video from 1978 predicts that all of America will become Buffalo, New York:

Here is a list of some of the things environmentalists were demanding back in the 1970s:

  • Outlawing the internal combustion engine for vehicles and outlawing or strict controls over all forms of combustion.
  • Rigid controls on the marketing of new products which will be required to prove a minimum pollution potential.
  • Controls on all research and development, to be halted at the slightest prospect of additional pollution.
  • Population controls, the number children per family prescribed and punishment for exceeding the limit.
  • We will be forced to sacrifice democracy by the laws that will protect us from further pollution.

Notice the word “control” appears throughout [I added the bold]. Giving liberals control over others has always been the purpose of ECO exaggeration.

I’m proud to say that I have a good bull shit detector, and I never believed the global cooling nonsense, and certainly didn’t believe a word of the global warming hysteria that followed on the heels of the complete discrediting of the global cooling rubbish. Now that global warming has been shown to not be happening, the goofs in the extremist environmental movement have reacted much the same as before and substituted climate change for global warming.

It was always smart to be skeptical of the need to ban CFCs because of a supposed hole in the ozone. It’s the sun that makes ozone, and the sun is a lot more powerful than the tiny bit of refrigerant that might leak out of your air conditioning. Removing very efficient R-22 freon and replacing it with much less efficient R-410A Freon was just stupid.

Science writer Matt Ridley has written a piece on the state of the ozone hole:

The ozone layer is healing. Or so said the news last week. Thanks to a treaty signed in Montreal in 1989 to get rid of refrigerant chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the planet’s stratospheric sunscreen has at last begun thickening again. Planetary disaster has been averted by politics.

For reasons I will explain, this news deserves to be taken with a large pinch of salt. You do not have to dig far to find evidence that the ozone hole was never nearly as dangerous as some people said, that it is not necessarily healing yet and that it might not have been caused mainly by CFCs anyway.

Read the whole article, it’s good.

I once subscribed to Skeptic Magazine. It was the name that interested me. I’m skeptical about a lot of stuff, and so it seemed this magazine was going to be a good read. Turns out, the only thing the writers in that magazine are skeptical about is God. The magazine that calls itself Skeptic is all in for global warming/climate change hoopla.

Draconian gun control has made Britain the most violent country in Europe

At Breitbart, How Gun Control Made England The “Most Violent Country in Europe,” by AWR Hawkins.

Gun control in Britain passed in stages, beginning just after World War I and continuing in a reactionary fashion with increasing strictness through the 1990s.

When the final stage arrived in 1997, and virtually all handguns were banned via the Firearms Act, the promise was a reduction in crime and greater safety for the British people. But the result was the emergence of Britain as the “most violent country in Europe.”

Making big decisions on emotion instead of logic usually leads to unwanted results.  Banning guns did not eliminate guns and it certainly did not eliminate violent crime, rather it increased it.  When it is known that no one has the means of self defense rogues with knives, razor blades, fists and feet, or just superior strength become the de facto neighborhood rulers.  Blend this nonsensical state of affairs with multiculturalism and political correctness and you get a Clockwork Orange existence for all who are not rich enough to live in a guarded fortress.

On the afternoon of May 22, 2013, a British Army soldier, Fusilier Drummer Lee Rigby of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, was attacked and killed by Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale near the Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich, southeast London.  Killer Michael Adebolajo proceeded to the nearest news camera with his bloody hands holding the butcher knife and the meat cleaver he used to brutally murder Lee Rigby and gave an insanely muddled speech while news crews, citizens and the police stood by helpless.  The cops said they were waiting for an armed response unit to arrive because Abebolajo still had a deadly weapon. The cops had no means to defend themselves.  Of course, there was no lawfully armed citizen who might have intervened to help the police, or perhaps have helped the unfortunate soldier. This was clearly a crime that could have been stopped only by someone with a gun.

Things are bit different here. Yesterday in Moore, Oklahoma, 30-year-old Alton Nolen had just been fired from his job at Vaughan Foods, a food distribution plant, when he drove to the front of the business, hit a vehicle and walked inside. He walked into the front office area where he met 54-year-old Colleen Hufford and began attacking her with a knife. He stabbed the helpless woman several times, and then severed her head. Nolen then went after 43-year-old Traci Johnson and began attacking her with his knife.

Alton Nolen

Alton Nolen

At this point a stark difference between America and Britain came into play. Mark Vaughan, an Oklahoma County reserve deputy and a former CEO of the business, shot Nolan several times as he was actively stabbing Johnson. If Vaughan had not been there, if Vaughan had not had his firearm, Traci Johnson would surely have been stabbed to death. Instead she is at a local hospital in stable condition and is expected to recover from her injuries.

Other workers at Vaughan Foods said Alton Nolen had been trying to convert them to Islam.

If there had been no one present with a gun Nolen would surely have killed Traci Johnson, and probably several others. Nolen picked the wrong state in the wrong country to carry out his savage attack.

When this sort of thing occurs in Britain not even the cops can stop it.  They have to stand their ground at a distance waiting for the other cops, the ones with rifles, to show up.  The killer even has time to give a bloody news conference. It’s a shameful state of affairs for a once-proud nation that defeated all enemies foreign and domestic for a thousand years until it came to be ruled by a class of feckless politically-correct multicultural pantywaists.

Democrats treated women like idiots and for some it worked

I’m referring to the “war on women” meme the Democrats used with such effectiveness in the 2012 election, and intend to ride into the 2014 election as well. I say they are treating women like idiots because the war on women chant invites women to believe that Republicans are misogynists.  It asks women to believe that half of America hates them.

Actually, it’s not all women that this too-stupid-to-believe political strategy is aimed at. There are millions of women who are Republicans. There a few more million women who are not Republicans but have chosen to marry Republican men. Surely they don’t believe this diabolical nonsense. There can’t be very many men of any political persuasion that are falling for it, either. It seems this strange message is aimed squarely at single women who have a natural affinity for the sort of political crapola Democrats have perfected for stimulating them to vote.  Democrats are directing this craziness at a select group while hoping it won’t alienate swing voters who are not insane.

Having ridden the abortion horse near to exhaustion Democrats needed a new tack driver and the war on women mantra was found to be just what they were looking for. This one threatens to wear out much faster though, and may already be about to lose it effectiveness. Especially since Republicans, for once, are refusing to stand idle while buckets of slop are thrown in their face. This time finally, they’re fighting back.

The latest attempt to paint Republicans as hating women is the Democrats’ far-fetched claim that Republicans want to outlaw birth control. Oh boy, if anyone needed any more proof that Democrats believe their single women constituents are retarded, this is it. In the past Republicans would have dismissed this nonsense as something nobody would believe. But the Democrats have well demonstrated that while their single women constituents may not be retarded in a clinical sense, they surely are politically retarded enough to believe just about anything the Democrats want them to believe. Republicans have finally figured this out, and have come to understand that a lie, even a whopper like this, will become the truth to some people if Republicans fail to mount an aggressive response.

The response that Colorado’s Cory Gardner and others are making is brilliant, and unlike the nostrums we have come to expect from Democrats, would probably be good policy if enacted. Cory Gardner is responding to Mark Udall’s attack on him about birth control by coming out for making birth control available without a doctor’s prescription.

This may not be original with Cory Gardner, but it surely was and is a Republican idea. Now there is a broad coalition of support for it, even among some Democrats. I say it’s brilliant political strategy because it has Democrats flummoxed. That, my friends, allows us to finally and for once think Republicans are cool. We should enjoy this while it lasts, before Republicans go back to being boring again.

Michele Fields interviews Leonardo DiCaprio and Senator Bernie Sanders at “The People’s Climate March”

Leonardo DiCaprio Owns 5 Luxury Homes, Rented World’s 5th Largest Yacht, Now Marches to Save Climate. Sen. Bernie Sanders is the avowed socialist Senator from Vermont. This is the way journalism should to be done, exposing the idiocy of the elite.

In this video Michele Fields interviews Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. who is apparently, a dope.

More Than 310 Thousand People with Skewed Priorities Flood New York. Looks like the 310 to 400 thousand people who marched in Manhattan yesterday have priorities that are out of touch with the rest of the occupants of this lovely planet. They also left behind a colossal mess of trash in NYC.

The Uninformed, Hypocritical, Emotionally-Driven People’s Climate March I suspect engineers and others who actually make the country run will not be well represented at the march tomorrow. My father used to say, “those who can, do…those who can’t, teach”. The marchers are trying to teach us how we should live our lives, when they have no clue what life would be like if they got their way.

As Germany and other countries rapidly backtrack on their commitment to the use of renewable energy, finding just how expensive and economically damaging it is, we Americans are allowing ourselves to be railroaded into a similar, bleak future. Maybe that’s the real goal of the People’s Climate March.


We are in a strange and dark chapter in history. The left doesn’t just want to demolish capitalism, they want to repeal the Enlightenment as well.

They want a second Dark Ages.

The Scientific Method

This was first posted on November 30, 2009.  It seems to have held up pretty well so I’m posting it again:

The now-exposed hoax and fraud of man-made global warming has shown that the scientific method was replaced with politics by a lot of people who should have know better. So what is meant by the “scientific method?” Well, one thing it means all the time and everywhere is that the data be made available to others so they can test the hypothesis to reproduce the results that were claimed. That the global warming proponents hid the data to prevent honest peer review of their hypothesis was a sure sign that the scientific method was not being followed.

Here is what the scientific method is, or is supposed to be:

The Scientific Method

1. The scientific method is a complex, variable, human process which differs in detail from scientist to scientist, and from discovery to discovery. However it may differ in detail or application from time to time it must always involve a cycle of observation, synthesis, hypothesis and prediction.

a. The first step in most scientific studies is the collection of data, including observations, measurement, and experiments.

b. The second step is the recognition of patterns– the search for symmetries. Most scientists have a deeply held belief that there are regularities and patterns in the physical universe.

i. Sometimes this step involves recognizing similarities among seemingly different phenomena, such as different forms of electricity.

ii. Sometimes this step is a mathematical synthesis, fitting disparate data into one type of equation, such as Kepler’s discovery of elliptical planetary orbits.

c. Once a pattern is found, the scientist will propose a possible explanation in the form of a hypothesis.

d. A scientific hypothesis, theory, or law must lead to unambiguous and testable predictions, requiring a new round of observations. Consequently, a scientific theory can always be disproved by an unfulfilled prediction, but it can never be completely proved.

e. At the center of this idealized cycle there is always a paradigm— a prevailing system of expectations about the natural world.  The classic book on scientific paradigms, how they change, and the resistance to every paradigm change, is The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn.

2. The scientific method is rarely followed as an exact cycle. Human imagination, intuition, and chance are vital elements of the process.

a. The example of Dmitri Mendeleev and the periodic table of elements exemplifies the scientific method.

b. Often an anomaly leads to new insights.

i. When anomalies are found that violate well-tested theories and laws, it usually means that the old theory or law is a valid special case of a more general law.

ii. An everyday example is provided by the “hypothesis” that all objects fall under the force of gravity. The anomaly of a helium-filled balloon leads to deeper understanding, i.e., if an object is lighter than the air it displaces it will rise rather than fall.

c. The scientific method is an elegant process for learning about the natural world, but it is neither intuitive nor obvious.

When the Earth stopped warming in 1997 and underwent a period of cooling that appears to be continuing today, this was a failure of a major prediction by the global warming proponents. Instead of a new round of data collection followed by a new hypothesis, the proponents merely changed the name of their pet theory from global warming to climate change and did their damnedest to hide the data and demonize other scientists who questioned their methods and conclusions. Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick Trick is an example.  See, The Hockey Stick Illusion, Climategate and the Corruption of Science.  Of course, that was not good science and it turns out, it was not good politics either.

Thinking about science and the sort of reasoning good science demands, here is something to ponder: Seven Fallacies of Thought and Reason: Common Errors in Reasoning and Argument from Pseudoscience.

This book was first published in 1841 and has been continuously in print since then: Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

Quotes of the Day

“CO2 is said to be responsible for global warming that is not occurring, for accelerated sea-level rise that is not occurring, for net glacial and sea-ice melt that is not occurring . . . and for increasing extreme weather that is not occurring.”

— Physicist Gordon Fulks of the Cascade Policy Institute.

climate extremist“…climate-change extremists are basing fewer of their appeals on fact and more on hysteria. You scream the loudest when the opposition is about to tip over on you and pin you down.”

John Fund

Democrats’ false claims about Republicans’ stance on birth control

Democrats are spending millions on advertising to convince you that Republicans want to take birth control pills away from women.  [for example, here] Of course, it’s not true. In fact, it’s brazen of Democrats to make such a claim and shows how stupid they believe the American people really are, that they might believe such rubbish.

It was way back in 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that access to birth control is a Constitutional right.  Justice Hugo Black, an enthusiastic supporter of nearly all of the Warren court’s expansion of the rights of criminals, dissented.  So did Justice Stewart Potter.  But neither Black nor Potter was against birth control.  The decision was based upon a finding of a right to privacy in the Constitution [ditto Roe v. Wade in 1973], although the Constitution has nothing at all to say about privacy.  Black was a Constitutional purist who simply couldn’t sign on to creating a Constitutional right to something that’s not in the Constitution.  He would have been in favor of doing that by a formal amendment instead of by Judicial fiat.

Stewart thought the Connecticut law was silly but Constitutional nevertheless.

That’s all history, and the Constitutional right to birth control is now enshrined in Supreme Court jurisprudence and won’t be changed anytime soon, if ever.

Republicans do not now nor have they ever, nor will they ever, desire to place the slightest impediment on a woman’s right to obtain birth control in the form of pills or any other form.  Moreover, they could not do so.  So why are the Democrat’s making this claim, aside from that they think Americans are stupid?  Well, of course, they will say anything about Republicans but that’s not the actual explanation for what’s going on here.

Republicans are trying to eliminate the requirement of a prescription for birth control pills. They want birth control to be sold over the counter without a prescription.  Democrats and their fellow travelers such as Planned Parenthood are against making birth control available over the counter.  Why? Because they want women to be dependent on them for their birth control.  Simple as that.

They’re a nasty bunch.  Women should punish Democrats in November for treating them like idiots, and for being against making birth control cheaper and more easily accessible.