- Follow budbromley on WordPress.com
-
Recent Posts
- DEI in the US military: How this perversion expanded
- What happened to Tucker? What happened to the Pope?
- USAID corruption was expensive to U.S. taxpayers and probably enabled terrorist atrocities
- Vote Theft
- Who is more likely to spread the pertussis bacterium (aka, whooping cough)—those vaccinated or those unvaccinated? (reblog +)
- Reparations?
- Brilliant video about the islamic caliphate
- The meaning of “net” as in net CO2 emissions, net zero, etc.
- Europe will never recover from this
- U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s historic speech
Archives
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- March 2011
A shoe string string theory
A shoe string string theory
The leading and current theory in physics is string theory, a string which connects multiple dimensional realms. Despite that virtually all professors of physics are students of string theory, there is no good evidence to support the theory. It’s all theory and nothing but theory. So far no way is known to test it.
Stepping or flying through a doorway, one moment in one dimension and in the next moment arriving in another dimension, but that moment seemed a lifetime when you were in it. That’s string theory.
Your task, if you choose to accept it, is to figure out why you took that step.
Posted in Uncategorized
5 Comments
Regime Change by Any Other Name? by Victor Davis Hanson. Reblog
May 22, 2017. Truth or consequences? Obama skated for far worse misdeeds.
The efforts to demonize and thus delegitimize and so emasculate Trump have reached sick new heights.
We are now watching insidious regime change, aimed at removing the president of the United States not because of what he has done so far, but because of his personality and what he might do to the Obama agenda — and because for a variety of cultural reasons, our elite simply despises his very being.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447864/trump-critics-left-right-want-him-removed
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
CO2 warming the oceans
“…water takes a lot of energy to heat up, and air doesn’t contain much. In fact, on a volume/volume basis, the ratio of heat capacities is about 3300 to 1. This means that to heat 1 litre of water by 1˚C it would take 3300 litres of air that was 2˚C hotter, or 1 litre of air that was about 3300˚C hotter!”
“This shouldn’t surprise anyone. If you ran a cold bath and then tried to heat it by putting a dozen heaters in the room, does anyone believe that the water would ever get hot?”
“The problem gets even stickier when you consider the size of the ocean. Basically, there is too much water and not enough air.”
“The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water! To heat it, even by a small amount, takes a staggering amount of energy. To heat it by a mere 1˚C, for example, an astonishing 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy are required.”
“Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!”
by Mark Imisides, industrial chemist
More here: http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2009/12/diy-ocean-heating/
Sooner or later, citizens will start prosecuting and jailing the fraudsters promoting global warming. The scale and collusion of this fraud makes Enron look like child’s play.
Posted in Uncategorized
4 Comments
The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party
Source: The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party
Watch the short video at the link above by Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, for Prager University. Published by PragerU.com
Transcript of the video and references below.
When you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party comes to mind? The Republicans? Or, the Democrats?
Most people would probably say the Democrats. But this answer is incorrect.
Since its founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.
The Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynchings, and fought against the civil rights acts of the 1950s and 1960s.
In contrast, the Republican Party was founded in 1854 as an anti-slavery party. Its mission was to stop the spread of slavery into the new western territories with the aim of abolishing it entirely. This effort, however, was dealt a major blow by the Supreme Court. In the 1857 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the court ruled that slaves aren’t citizens; they’re property. The seven justices who voted in favor of slavery? All Democrats. The two justices who dissented? Both Republicans.
The slavery question was, of course, ultimately resolved by a bloody civil war. The commander-in-chief during that war was the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln – the man who freed the slaves.
Six days after the Confederate army surrendered, John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, assassinated President Lincoln. Lincoln’s vice president, a Democrat named Andrew Johnson, assumed the presidency. But Johnson adamantly opposed Lincoln’s plan to integrate the newly freed slaves into the South’s economic and social order.
Johnson and the Democratic Party were unified in their opposition to the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery; the 14th Amendment, which gave blacks citizenship; and the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the vote. All three passed only because of universal Republican support.
During the era of Reconstruction, federal troops stationed in the south helped secure rights for the newly freed slaves. Hundreds of black men were elected to southern state legislatures as Republicans, and 22 black Republicans served in the US Congress by 1900. The Democrats did not elect a black man to Congress until 1935.
But after Reconstruction ended, when the federal troops went home, Democrats roared back into power in the South. They quickly reestablished white supremacy across the region with measures like black codes – laws that restricted the ability of blacks to own property and run businesses. And they imposed poll taxes and literacy tests, used to subvert the black citizen’s right to vote.
And how was all of this enforced? By terror — much of it instigated by the Ku Klux Klan, founded by a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest.
As historian Eric Foner – himself a Democrat – notes:
“In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”
President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, shared many views with the Klan. He re-segregated many federal agencies, and even screened the first movie ever played at the White House – the racist film “The Birth of a Nation,” originally entitled “The Clansman.”
A few decades later, the only serious congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats.
Eighty percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill. Less than 70 percent of Democrats did. Democratic senators filibustered the bill for 75 days, until Republicans mustered the few extra votes needed to break the logjam.
And when all of their efforts to enslave blacks, keep them enslaved, and then keep them from voting had failed, the Democrats came up with a new strategy: If black people are going to vote, they might as well vote for Democrats. As President Lyndon Johnson was purported to have said about the Civil Rights Act, “I’ll have them n*****s voting Democrat for two hundred years.”
So now, the Democratic Party prospers on the votes of the very people it has spent much of its history oppressing.
Democrats falsely claim that the Republican Party is the villain, when in reality it’s the failed policies of the Democratic Party that have kept blacks down. Massive government welfare has decimated the black family. Opposition to school choice has kept them trapped in failing schools. Politically correct policing has left black neighborhoods defenseless against violent crime.
So, when you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party should come to mind?
I’m Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, for Prager University.
Since its founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, including abolishing slavery.
- The Democratic Party fought against the abolition of slavery, instigated the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, participated in and promoted lynchings, and fought against the civil rights acts of the mid-20th century.View Source
- The Republican Party was founded in 1854 as an anti-slavery party, established to stop the spread of slavery into the new Western territories and ultimately abolish it altogether.View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Abduction: How Liberalism Steals Our Children’s Hearts And Minds” – Carol SwainView Source
The Ku Klux Klan was formed by southern Democrats to keep African Americans and Republicans out of political power.
- The KKK was an organization formed by southern Democrats in order to keep African Americans and Republicans out of political power.View Source
- According to historian Dr. Eric Foner, “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Bamboozled: How Americans are being Exploited by the Lies of the Liberal Agenda” – Angela McGlowanView Source
Which political party defended slavery, started the Civil War, founded the Ku Klux Klan, and imposed segregation? The Democratic Party.
- The Democratic Party fought against the abolition of slavery, instigated the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, participated in and promoted lynchings, and fought against the civil rights acts of the mid-20th century.View Source
- The Republican Party was founded in 1854 as an anti-slavery party, established to stop the spread of slavery into the new Western territories and ultimately abolish it altogether.View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Be the People: A Call to Reclaim America’s Faith and Promise” – Carol SwainView Source
Southern Democrats sought to block the influence of black voters after the Civil War.
- Democrats gerrymandered Congressional voting districts to minimize the influence of blacks, allowing Democrats to monopolize power at the state level.View Source
- According to historian Dr. Eric Foner, “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Bamboozled: How Americans are being Exploited by the Lies of the Liberal Agenda” – Angela McGlowanView Source
Inconvenient fact: More Republicans voted in favor of the 1964 Civil Rights Act than Democrats.
- Southern Democrats attempted to filibuster the Civil Rights Act.View Source
- A total of 80% of Republicans in both houses of Congress voted for the Civil Rights Act. Only 60% of Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act.View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Be the People: A Call to Reclaim America’s Faith and Promise” – Carol SwainView Source
It was the Democratic Supreme Court justices who promoted slavery in the Dredd Scott decision. The Republican justices dissented.
- The Dred Scott v Sandford case challenged the then-status-quo that blacks could not be citizens and thus were not protected by constitutional rights.View Source
- All seven of the Democratic justices voted to deny rights to blacks and promote the pro-slavery agenda in the Dred Scott v Sandford case, and both Republican justices dissented in favor of solidifying rights for blacks.View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Abduction: How Liberalism Steals Our Children’s Hearts And Minds” – Carol SwainView Source
The Ku Klux Klan operated as a tool for the Democratic Party in the post-Civil War south. Their enemy: Republican and black politicians.
- One of the goals of the KKK was to undermine and defeat the Republican Party.View Source
- According to historian Dr. Eric Foner, “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Bamboozled: How Americans are being Exploited by the Lies of the Liberal Agenda” – Angela McGlowanView Source
What did all the justices who voted to promote slavery in the Dredd Scott case have in common? They were all Democrats.
- The Dred Scott v Sandford case challenged the then-status-quo that blacks could not be citizens and thus were not protected by constitutional rights.View Source
- All seven of the Democratic justices voted to deny rights to blacks and promote the pro-slavery agenda in the Dred Scott v Sandford case, and both Republican justices dissented in favor of solidifying rights for blacks.View Source
- WATCH: Political science professor Carol Swain on the Democratic Party’s legacy of racial discrimination.View Source
- Related reading: “Be the People: A Call to Reclaim America’s Faith and Promise” – Carol SwainView Source
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Largest U.S. solar panel maker files for bankruptcy
Largest US Solar Panel Maker Files for Bankruptcy After Receiving $206 Million in Subsidies
Largest US Solar Panel Maker Files for Bankruptcy After Receiving $206 Million in Subsidies
bit.lry/2qabRyg
bit.ly/2qabRyg
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Enhanced CO2 uptake at a shallow Arctic Ocean seep field overwhelms the positive warming potential of emitted methane. PNAS: negative radiative forcing from CO2 uptake is up to 231 times greater than positive radiative forcing from methane emissions.
Enhanced CO2 uptake at a shallow Arctic Ocean seep field overwhelms the positive warming potential of emitted methane
- John W. Pohlmana,1,
- Jens Greinertb,c,d,
- Carolyn Ruppela,
- Anna Silyakovac,
- Lisa Vielstädteb,
- Michael Cassoa,
- Jürgen Mienertc, and
- Stefan Bünzc
-
Edited by Jonathan J. Cole, Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Avon, NC, and approved March 8, 2017 (received for review November 15, 2016)
Significance
Methane released from the seafloor and transported to the atmosphere has the potential to amplify global warming. At an arctic site characterized by high methane flux from the seafloor, we measured methane and carbon dioxide (CO2) exchange across the sea−air interface. We found that CO2 uptake in an area of elevated methane efflux was enhanced relative to surrounding waters, such that the negative radiative forcing effect (cooling) resulting from CO2 uptake overwhelmed the positive radiative forcing effect (warming) supported by methane output. Our work suggests physical mechanisms (e.g., upwelling) that transport methane to the surface may also transport nutrient-enriched water that supports enhanced primary production and CO2 drawdown. These areas of methane seepage may be net greenhouse gas sinks.
Abstract
Continued warming of the Arctic Ocean in coming decades is projected to trigger the release of teragrams (1 Tg = 106 tons) of methane from thawing subsea permafrost on shallow continental shelves and dissociation of methane hydrate on upper continental slopes. On the shallow shelves (<100 m water depth), methane released from the seafloor may reach the atmosphere and potentially amplify global warming. On the other hand, biological uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) has the potential to offset the positive warming potential of emitted methane, a process that has not received detailed consideration for these settings. Continuous sea−air gas flux data collected over a shallow ebullitive methane seep field on the Svalbard margin reveal atmospheric CO2 uptake rates (−33,300 ± 7,900 μmol m−2⋅d−1) twice that of surrounding waters and ∼1,900 times greater than the diffusive sea−air methane efflux (17.3 ± 4.8 μmol m−2⋅d−1). The negative radiative forcing expected from this CO2 uptake is up to 231 times greater than the positive radiative forcing from the methane emissions. Surface water characteristics (e.g., high dissolved oxygen, high pH, and enrichment of 13C in CO2) indicate that upwelling of cold, nutrient-rich water from near the seafloor accompanies methane emissions and stimulates CO2 consumption by photosynthesizing phytoplankton. These findings challenge the widely held perception that areas characterized by shallow-water methane seeps and/or strongly elevated sea−air methane flux always increase the global atmospheric greenhouse gas burden.
Footnotes
- 1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: jpohlman@usgs.gov.
-
Author contributions: J.W.P., J.G., and S.B. designed research; J.W.P., J.G., A.S., and M.C. performed shipboard research; J.W.P., J.G., and M.C. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; J.W.P., J.G., C.R., and L.V. analyzed data; and J.W.P., J.G., C.R., and J.M. wrote the paper.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
News people
It’s never good when newspeople become the news. Period. Even if it’s fake news disguised as comedy. That’s entertainment, not reality.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Another climate whistleblower
Physicist Steven Koonin, former undersecretary in the Department of Energy in the Obama administration has become a whistleblower regarding the “Obama administration’s manipulated ‘climate change’ data.” “What you saw coming out of the press releases about climate data, climate analysis, was, I’d say, misleading, sometimes just wrong.”
Short video interview by Wall Street Journal:
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.