If we equate the Americans who gave their lives in WWI, WWII, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Iraq wars, the Afghanistan War and more with the evil they were fighting, then we render their sacrifice worthless.

It is not the fault of the soldier that diplomacy failed or was subverted. It is not their fault of the soldier that American political leadership failed or was subverted. It is the fault of voters who hear what they want to hear and ignore the rest, like the convenient cell phone music app, instead of digging for facts on candidates, laws and history which are hidden by highly paid media consultants behind red-meat issues like bathrooms, gender, abortion, religion, liberty, guns, climate, taxes and never-ending half truth promises.

The character disorders of candidates and the corruption of natural law are there for your eyes and ears, but most of you have already lost your will to survive. You just don’t know it yet. This is the intended effect of moral equivalence or moral relativism. This is how collectivism, socialism, and communism work and are intended to work. Obama is merely the current pope.

Most of you have lost the ability to determine for yourself right from wrong, yet you believe you made an informed decision. But the horse left the barn and barn burned down. Most of you have lost the ability to discriminate right from wrong and you believe that discrimination itself is wrong, though it is the only thing that can save you now. It won’t be long before you are wearing the uniform, comrade.

Politicians, anxious to protect their power and cushy life, have turned the government and law against you and yet call themselves public servants. Government has turn the law upside down. That which was designed to protect you from government is now protecting government.

You accept the government-promoted premise that the 0.3% of the population who are gender confused should be admitted to their restroom of choice when the President commands it without considering that the other 99.7% of the people lost freedom by being forced to behave against their innate, natural right to privacy. In doublespeak, that is called social justice.

You accept the government-promoted premise that more guns cause more murders therefore government should control guns, but you never looked for the evidence beneath the carefully manicured media campaign that shows murders and violent crimes declining where and when guns are not controlled. It is the politicians, bureaucrats and criminals who fear your guns and they will still have guns when you give up yours.

You accept the government-promoted fiction that women’s rights equal the right to kill a child without questioning the motive for such an unnatural act.

You accept the government and politician-promoted propaganda that we need more military, more police power, more secrecy and more spying to fight and kill to restore and protect liberty overseas and at home, until or unless you or a loved one are strip-searched, home-invaded or cyber-assaulted under color of authority. You are a pawn and you know it.

You think it can’t happen here, not to you. You think you have nothing to hide. You believe in social justice. You think I am arrogant. You have been assimilated. http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/…/obamas-ho-chi-minh-trail.…

“Cambridge University electrical engineering professor Dr. M.J. Kelly concluded in a peer-reviewed journal article (at the link below) that attempts to fight global warming with green energy will impoverish the world.”

“It is important to note the scale of the perceived problem. The entire history of modern civilization that started with the first industrial revolution has been enabled by the burning of fossil fuels. Our mobility, our health and lifestyles, our diet and its variety, our education system, particularly at the higher level, and our high culture would be quite impossible without fossil fuels, which have provided over 90% of the energy consumed on the earth since 1800. Today, geothermal, hydro- and nuclear power, together with the historic biofuels of wood and straw, account for about 15% of our energy use. 18 Even though it is 40 years since the first oil shocks kick-started the modern renewable energy developments (wind, solar, and cultivated biomass), we still get rather less than 1% of our world energy from these sources. Indeed the rate at which fossil fuels are growing is seven times that at which the low carbon energies are growing, as the ratio of fossil fuel energy used to total energy used has remained unchanged since 1990 at 85%. 19 The call to decarbonize the global economy by 80% by 2050 can now only be described as glib in my opinion, as the underlying analysis shows it is only possible if we wish to see large parts of the population die from starvation, destitution or violence in the absence of enough low-carbon energy to sustain society.”

http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FMRE%2FMRE3%2FS2329222916000039a.pdf&code=5f88866466d0918f7fc0936b8a4b398c

https://www.technocracy.news/index.php/2016/05/27/like-germany-denmark-admits-wind-power-generation-expensive/

Temperatures during the period from about 1944 to 1975 directly contradict the global warming hypothesis. This was the period of recovery from WWII when industrial growth was very fast, and gasoline engines were in mass production and use. Little attention was paid to combustion efficiency in vehicles, factories or homes. CO2 emissions and atmospheric concentration of CO2 as well as actual air pollution was growing consistently. But the temperature trend declined for about 30 years.

According to hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and the CO2 forcing parameter, the temperature trend should have been rising, not falling. At the time, the press and experts were reporting global cooling and many expected a new ice age.

Now in 2016 climate experts want to “adjust” the data for this cooling period, so that the cooling disappears, because it reveals their alarmist claims of global warming/climate change are a fraud…a way to extract money and political power from citizens, companies and states.

You might keep this graph to compare as the data are “adjusted.”

Newsweek, 1975

References

(1)  For graph:  http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/us/110/0/tavg/1/4/1944-1975?base_prd=true&firstbaseyear=1895&lastbaseyear=1944&trend=true&trend_base=100&firsttrendyear=1944&lasttrendyear=1975

(2) About NOAA adjusting data:  http://www.examiner.com/article/how-noaa-rewrote-climate-data-to-hide-global-warming-pause

One is wisdom, knowledge and virtue.

Be one with the river, but never loose the last line.  Then, there is no choice and soon the river becomes ocean.  Be aware of that line lest you stretch it too far.  Then, the relation is lost and inevitably we build a cross.

“The longest NOAA tide gauge data record is at the Battery, New York with a 160 year long measurement period. This location along with all other U.S. coastal locations show no sea level rise acceleration.”

“Climate alarmists continue to try and mislead the public by claiming  that the Statue of Liberty is in “imminent jeopardy” because of rising sea levels but the unchanging rate of sea level rise present at the Battery would require more than 20,000 years to cover the base.  That time period hardly qualifies as “imminent jeopardy”.”

It is well to remind readers that if there were a trend of increasing global warming caused by the increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration that results from the increased combustion of fossil fuels by humans that began during the industrial revolution, then, if that were true, water in the oceans would be expanding and an acceleration in the rise of sea level would be measured. The fact that there is no acceleration is yet another confirmation that there is no increased global warming due to humans.

At the following link is the excellent post of the May 28, 2016 blog in WattsUpWithThat dot com.

Maturity diagram showing net change since 17 May 2008 in the global monthly surface air temperature record prepared by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), USA [part of NOAA]. The net result of the adjustments made are becoming substantial, and adjustments since May 2006 occasionally exceeds 0.1^oC. Before 1945 global temperatures are generally changed toward lower values, and toward higher values after 1945, resulting in a more pronounced 20th century warming (about 0.15^oC) compared to the NCDC temperature record published in May 2008.

http://www.climate4you.com/

“Let me say it as simply as I can. Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”- Obama at his swearing-in ceremony, January 21, 2009 (1)

This is a problem. Thanks to Obama voters, we are moving rapidly to the politburo stage of socialism.

The following is by Luke Rosiak (link below with video).

Headline:  Obama Admin Deletes Conflict Of Interest Disclosures For Top Bureaucrats [VIDEO] (2)

Conflict of interest disclosure reports filed by top federal officials were removed from public view by the Obama administration in recent months, a move that government transparency and accountability advocates condemn as a major setback.

The Office of Government Ethics (OGE) reports are the primary tool that watchdog journalists, political activists and interested voters can use to guard against presidential appointees using their positions to enrich themselves or others.

For years, the OGE website featured a sortable, searchable list of over 1,000 government appointees, including their names, agencies and titles, and flagging new ones. By clicking on a name, users could easily access multiple disclosures for the appointee, including yearly financial accounting, stock ownership and a letter detailing any agreements surrounding conflicts, such as issues when the individual promises to recuse himself.

By January, the list was inexplicably removed, leaving only a search box. That action severely reduced the chance of officials’ finances being scrutinized because it became necessary to know the name of a person and have a reason to want to look up that individual, as opposed to, for example, looking for listings from an agency of interest.

Now, even that capability is gone, along with almost all references to actually seeing the disclosures. Thousands of PDFs have also been deleted, leaving dead links.

OGE referred press calls to Seth Jaffe, who didn’t respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s query placed on Monday.

“This is a problem,” Daniel Schuman, a policy analyst at the liberal group Demand Progress, told TheDCNF. “They should put it back. It’s very odd there’s no explanation.”

John Wonderlich, head of the transparency group the Sunlight Foundation, called it a “big step backward,” saying “the administration should be demonstrating how digital disclosure should strengthen our accountability systems, and creating barriers to access is the opposite of progress.”

Previously, Sunlight had praised President Barack Obama, who had pledged at the outset of his first term in the Oval Office to have the “most transparent [administration] in history.”

The OGE documents also include “ethics waivers,” documents that showed despite Obama making pledges such as not to appoint former lobbyists, this was frequently done.

Thanks to the disclosures, the public recently learned that Secretary of State John Kerry has millions invested in offshore tax havens. The disclosures also showed that Medicare chief Andy Slavitt took actions relating to firms he had financial ties to, and that he got a waiver to do so.

OGE’s role as an independent entity is important in serving as a check against self-interested departments. The disclosures showed that the Medicare agency lied about Slavitt getting preferential tax treatment.

They also showed a former union lawyer who was appointed to head a labor relations agency steered lucrative contracts to his old law firm despite signing an agreement saying he “will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which Bredhoff & Kaiser is a party or represents a party unless I am first authorized.”

The site’s menu now says nothing about viewing disclosures, but buried several clicks in to a section called “Media” allows you to fill out a form requiring highly specific information about a person and the disclosure you are requesting.

When TheDCNF called to inquire about the change, the form had to be sent in via snail mail. Soon after the call, they added a cumbersome online form that was submitted to an employee who supposedly would send the documents several days later.

TheDCNF filled out the form and several days later, got rejected without explanation.

“The records that you requested are not maintained in the Office of Government Ethics. Please contact the employing agency/agencies for these records,” Irene Houston wrote.

(1) http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2009/01/obama012109.html

(2)  http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/25/obamas-admin-deletes-conflict-of-interest-disclosures-for-top-bureaucrats/#ixzz49suysMJz

“Observations of the global energy budget and their implications” (9)

“The rate of global mean warming has been lower over the past decade than previously. It has been argued (1–5) that this observation might require a downwards revision of estimates of equilibrium climate sensitivity, that is, the long-term (equilibrium) temperature response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.”

“Using up-to-date data on radiative forcing, global mean surface temperature and total heat uptake in the Earth system, we find that the global energy budget (6) implies a range of values for the equilibrium climate sensitivity that is in agreement with earlier estimates, within the limits of uncertainty.”

“The energy budget of the most recent decade does, however, indicate a lower range of values for the more policy-relevant (7) transient climate response (the temperature increase at the point of doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration following a linear ramp of increasing greenhouse gas forcing) than the range obtained by either analysing the energy budget of earlier decades or current climate model simulations. (8)

“Our results match those of other observation-based studies (15) and suggest that the TCRs of some of the models in the CMIP5 ensemble (10) with the strongest climate response to increases in atmospheric CO2 levels may be inconsistent with recent observations —“

They explain, “The best estimate of TCR [transient climate response] based on OBSERVATION of the most recent decade is 1.3 °C (0.9–2.0 °C;) This is lower than estimates derived from data of the 1990s 1.6 °C (0.9–3.1 °C); or for the 1970–2009 period as a whole 1.4 °C (0.7–2.5 °C)”

But here is the key:  “within the limits of uncertainty.”  Note that the limits of uncertainty are huge, plus or minus 50% of their best estimate of the MEASURED average temperature.  They are betting our money on a coin toss using a formula that is not good at predicting coin tosses.

They are acknowledging that climate models predicted temperatures that were too high. A doubling of CO2 does not produce as much temperature increase as they expected, even though they gave themselves a huge margin of error.  So they want to try again.  They are addicted.

By analogy, the government bet over $100 billion of our money that the Dow Jones stock market average would finish at 14,000.  It didn’t.  But within the limits of uncertainty the government stock brokers gave themselves, the Dow could have been at 7,000 or at 25,000 and the government would still consider that the bet with our money was reasonable.  We lost our $100 billion and now they will lower their best estimate and bet some more of our money.  Think gambling addiction.

References

1. Aldrin, M. et al. Environmetrics 23, 253–271 (2012).
2. Lewis, N. J. Clim. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00473.1 (2013).
3. Ring, M. J., Lindner, D., Cross, E. F. & Schlesinger, M. E. Atmos. Clim. Sci. 2, 401–415 (2012).
4. Stott, P. A., Good, P., Jones, G., Gillett, N. P. & Hawkins, E. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 014024 (2013).
5. Schwartz, S. E. Surv. Geophys. 33, 745–777 (2012).
6. Gregory, J. M. & Forster, P. M. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 113, D23105 (2008).
7. Allen, M. R. & Frame, D. J. Science 318, 582–583 (2007).
8. Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2011).
9. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/76064/7/ngeo1836%281%29_with_coversheet.pdf
10. 10. Forster, P. M. et al. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118, 1–12 (2013)
11. Gillett, N. P., Arora, V. K., Matthews, D. & Allen, M. R. J. Clim. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00476.1 (2013).