WE HAVE BEEN DECEIVED IN EVERYTHING

We have been deceived in everything.

Today, April 16 2020, like many other days, before going outside I looked at the temperature on my phone. Currently, at 9:45 AM, it reads 37 degrees. I wondered how it could be snowing outside.

I received a notification on my phone that FOX NEWS was interviewing Kellyanne Conway, a Trump advisor.

The interview began with Bill De Blasio, Mayor of New York City, explaining, “If we act the wrong way, jump too soon, then we could see a resurgence…so we get one chance to get it right.”

Is this a political message or a pseudo-science democrat party fabrication? Who says we only get one chance?

Do we dare trust politicians who have used models and modelers who have gotten nothing right?

Fauci was involved with HIV/AIDS when it began. Still no vaccine, no cure, just treatment. He has never been good at his job and now Trump trusts this buffoon and all the other modelers brought over from global hoaxing?

De Blasio is not his name. He is of German descent. He changed his name to deceive New Yorkers.

What an assault on truth. I cannot reveal my sources, sorry, peoples’ lives and jobs are at stake, but covid does not exist in epidemic and certainly not pandemic, degrees. I know of two nurses in different cities that told me they are under instruction, command to report anything as covid-19 that has similar signs and symptoms as the so-called covid. They re forced to report everything that slightly resembles covid-19 signs and symptoms, even when tests show negative. That is one huge fraud.

De Blasio, the Cuomo morons, Utah gov herbie stalin, and others are part of the hoax. I have wondered about Trump since he took office.

De Blasio openly lied about many things in that 15 second clip. Who is “we”? Is he talking about the medical profession and politicos who have worked so hard to deceive Americans?

We have been classically conditioned to believe that some professions are above others, above the regular working “taxpayers” (how I hate that commie/bolshevik term), and that we should give our unreserved, irrepressible love and support to the medical profession, because they ravage America and kill so efficiently.

CNBC, February 22, 2018 reported the third leading cause of death in the United States is medical error.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/22/medical-errors-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-america.html

Do doctors and medicos know this? Do nurses offer a caveat, disclaimer or warning when people step into the hospital? Are some nurses dishonest? No, heavens no. The medical profession is absolute. The medical profession is not run by the pharmaceutical companies, right Bernie Sanders, democrats?

Democrats attack corporations especially pharmaceutical (evil) corporations for the fraud and ravaging heaped upon America. True or fabricated by the bolshevik democrat party and liberals, it matters not that they attack to destroy everything that does not fit their goal of world domination through centralized government control.

It can be said I took a stab at the dem/libs, and it is true, but it was done to show the near absolute compliant forced ideological oppression of the ignorant democrat party masses.

The democrats know pharmakaia, the pharmaceutical companies, are rotten to the core and now, even now, they defer to the ravaging, dishonesty and lying of big pharma, during this fabricated crisis. Where is the famed democrat and liberal sense of indignation and distrust for covid-19 as an inherent evil of an evil corporations, as a spawn of big pharma?

Are democrats so dronish they follow their leaders in switching ideologies at the drop of a face mask?

To believe a corrupt medical profession, advising political appointees; political agents, in effect, who report from a pharmaceutical perspective of deception, on any aspect of this ruse, is insanity.

There is no way the whole chain of command can suddenly be honest.

This is like the story of the frog and the scorpion.

The scorpion asks the frog for a ride across the pond. The frog replies, ‘Are you crazy,? You will sting me.” The scorpion reassures the frog it really is not in his interest to sting the frog because it, along with the frog, would drown. The frog, obliges and the scorpion stings the frog when they are almost to the shore. As they both drown the frog asks the scorpion, ‘Why did you do that? Why did you kill both of us?’

The scorpion’s reply, I am a scorpion, it is what I do. You knew I was a scorpion. did you think I was not going to be a scorpion thoughout?’

You see, the scorpion is a scorpion and the scorpion cannot help but be a scorpion. The scorpion is an incorrigible scorpion, like liars are liars.

The medical profession, a part of pharma, cannot help but be agents for pharma, so lies are part of the medical profession because they are part of the big dirty, corrupt lying pharmaceutical government-corporate conglomerate. Pharma cannot help itself. Like the scorpion it lies because it cannot stop from being a lying industry. The medical industry, being a part of it, cannot stop itself from being itself, and constantly deceive and lie as well.

So, why do we believe this covid scare has any integrity, especially when it derives from a creation of two well known lying sources?

Read some of my posts regarding my brushes with dangerously stupid doctors.

There is no way there is not lying at some level in all this chain of political doctoring. I would estimate there is gross deception at most levels and slight deception in the rest: deception through and through.

“How reality based is May 1st Kelyanne?”, asked the reporter.

Conway replied, “For some places it certainly can be a reality, if testing is available, if your infection rates are low, your death rates are low, if low hospital capacity is there, including ventilators and medical personnel beds, beds in the ICU. All that is taken into account because the President has made…”

The President has made numerous assumptions from liars in big pharma and the failed CDC, or Trump is part of the deceptive seizing of control over everyone.

Conway’s answer would be more correct if she injected the variable of dishonesty pharma and medicos cannot help but repeat.

Her answer would read, ‘For some places, but not really, if testing is available and the professionals don’t lie  and hospital administrations don’t lie; if your infection rates are not lies or fraudulent under fear of being fired; your death rates due to heart failure, diabetes, “flu” signs and symptoms, influenza, are not reported as the real causes; if hospitals are allowed to transform units to serve the needs of the ill, instead of laying off staff in other care units; if low hospital capacity means cool photo opportunities and propaganda pictures are good; if low hospital capacity can be hidden as a reality, if low hospital capacity can be underreported or not reported at all, then we can certainly let non-victims of covid-19 media melee live their lives…..

I could go on and on.

Democrats should surely believe this because the attacks on Trump from dem/libs for three years, is thatTrump is not qualified or he is absolutely corrupt. Suddenly, to democrat party supporters, Trump has credibility. Why? Is it because the media is giving credibility to the lying medicos and CDC losers-at-every-challenge?

I am speculating regarding where and who. The reality is the medical professionals are liars because they are part of a big conglomerate deception. So, all the conditions Conway lists are inapplicable because the numbers are dead wrong fabrications from an incorrigible source: big pharma, medical industry and government losers.

There is no reality to anything coming from the media regurgitating lies from sources everyone knows are ravaging liars. How many people have been killed in the last 20 years by medico error, millions?

20,000 deaths due to covid is a drop in the bucket compared with medical error deaths. If pharma and medicos care not for the millions who have died, what makes anyone, including lying loser liberal media, think they care for the lives they are taking now? 

We are deceived, blatantly lied to about global warming. How is it possible that it snows when it is 37 degrees?

Again, only to the naiive and trusting drones do these two signs of totalitarianism seem disconnected. To those who intend to rule and “cleanse” “their” earth, these are connected because they made it so.

Last night, April 15th, I stepped outside and discovered it was colder than I thought. I went back into the house and looked at my phone. The weather report said it was 50 degrees. I walked over to my window where there is a thermometer and read it at 45 degrees. I took out a thermometer and walked outside away from the house and vehicles, and set it on a tree stump, the back insulated from the stump with a dry cloth.

When I looked ten minutes later the thermometer read 45 degrees.

Why are we being lied to about weather? Who is doing it?

Remember people who lie have to lie to cover something they cannot report or state with surety of truth.

Is it all just a mistake. One day last year it snowed in Murray at 39 degrees.

Has snow changed? If so, why has it not been studied, investigated and reported? No conclusions are forthcoming. Maybe there are no conclusions because the conclusions do not support the political agenda of global warming and apocalyptic meltdown.

Covid sure helps distract from this but by the summer’s end, mid August, the global hoaxers will claim this has been the warmest year on record, for 10 years in a row, now. Morons, killing people.

REVIEW OF “VARIABILITY OF ANTARCTIC OZONE LOSS IN THE LAST DECADE (2004-2013: HIGH RESOLUTION SIMULATIONS COMPARED TO Aura MLS OBSERVATIONS”

REVIEW OF “Variability of Antarctic ozone loss in the last decade (2004-2013): high resolution simulations compared to Aura MLS observations”

https://liberalnewsreview.com/2020/01/20/review-of-variability-of-antarctic-ozone-loss-in-the-last-decade-2004-2013-high-resolution-simulations-compared-to-aura-mls-observations/

This commentary began as a response to a comment on facebook. The comment itself was typical, sub-intelligent liberal regurgitation of a global warming/climate change cliché. A reference was included and I naturally, as always, going to the sources for fact and truth, found the reference and began the dissection.

The following is the reference:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-00722-7?fbclid=IwAR3SiovfovKCQLcAzbWT3dTm84Izuj-h-7tlA1QkSLinzP9tWUHiFaTP9G4

There was a time when I would hesitate to challenge the apparent scientific commentary for fear I might find something solid, such as a credible argument or reference. I, occasionally looked at articles and news reports with apprehension. I am always relived and sorry at the same time: relieved my fears were nothing and the article is a fraud, and sad that there are so many frauds and cheats, liars and ignoramuses in science.

First and foremost I was always relieved that my fellow Americans of a democrat party/liberal bend did not disappoint. As always, the “article”, commentary or report is one lie after another, and, hence, easy to research, dissect and refute. As always, there is no science, very little intelligence and never a truth uttered from a credible or verifiable source.

I am always, naturally disappointed and relieved, again, that any time I look, in fact every time I have searched the sources, I find fallacious, unreliable and unscientific; even silly reporting, references and democrat/liberal stars, who are and say nothing. In this case, I was actually excited to dissect this fake news article. I did a search for the writer and found a “profile”, resume, to use the word loosely.

The following is an edited version of my response on facebook.

Has anybody ever just wondered how they, whoever they is, measured ozone? What scientist went up in an aircraft, stuck a measuring instrument out the window, and observed the ozone layer was less and depleted? Less, compared to what? Who measured ozone 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 30 years ago? 

This discussion of depleted ozone layer began in the late 1970s. What references prior to that time period did “scientists” use to compare, to make the assessment that the ozone layer was less than “before”? When was the before? From the perspective of “scientists” in the 1970s, what references to measurements and data, prior to their claims, so long ago, did they reference?

Who measured anything anytime to enable a comparison? What instrument and mechanism measures ozone? Is it an ozonometer, or speculation and theory? I have never heard of an ozonometer.

The article has two authors. One is the subject of this commentary: Kuttipurath Jayanarayanan.

Jayanarayanan’s profile, resumé, is pretentious from title to last sentence. It is all sophist and rhetorical. It is one overall misnomer: an oxymoron anti-science science cliché after silly misleading-headline cliché. The report itself does not contain a single measurement or explanation of one single aspect of scientific methodology used or employed.

Not only is there no mention of a measurement or data, the report makes no apologies for drawing conclusions about the arctic when the report focuses on the Antarctic. There is not a single measurement in the arctic, but the claim includes both north and south poles. In fact there is actually no antarctic measurement either, just speculation and “models”.

Only someone with no comprehension of scientific modalities would attempt to present conclusions and effects from no measurements or causes. Not a single, “scientist” would attempt such deception.

If, as the study claims, the ozone in the Antarctic is less, or gone, where did it go? Did it breakdown or flow to other locations or planets? Is it possible all the ozone floated to the Arctic? Did anyone think of that? Did anyone check the atmosphere for remnants of ozone moving or dissipating? Is it not curious that suddenly someone, a series of nobody-someone’s, claims there is a hole in the ozone? Is that not like saying, suddenly, we have fewer polar bears when the polar bear population was never counted. Fewer than what?, is the question. Less ozone than what, is the natural query.

Did the ozone float to the Arctic? This is not an odd question, you must realize. If ozone is unique to the polar regions and it is claimed to have disappeared from the Antarctic, where did it go? Ozone surely seeks polar regions. Is it possible it floated to the Arctic? Nobody would know and the pseudo-scientists are so dumb they could not surmise, suppose or think to think. They re so bereft of science they did not even ask the question, what happened to the ozone in the Antarctic? They could not possibly ask the question of the Arctic because they had no idea ozone was there, gone, or ever existed in the Arctic. Nobody measured it, the morons just presumed it was less as well. How silly.

A real scientist would have asked innumerable questions. Try these two: What happens to ozone, does it move or breakdown? If ozone breaks down, to what does it change? Notice that cool word, “change”? Change is life, measuring change is science.

A real scientist would also ask, do we have proof, measurements or data that shows what happens to this theoretical, speculative thing that mystery-scientists call ozone?

I looked at the article, found two authors, and did a search for Kuttipurath Jayanarayanan.

Please, go yourselves and look at the silly resumé/profile:

http://www1.iitkgp.ac.in/fac-profiles/showprofile.php?empcode=SWmUS

Notice the “resumé” includes “Research areas”. What is a research area when there is no mention of research?

Next we read more seemingly scientific jargon: “Numerical modeling of Oceans and Atmosphere”

Modeling is not research. As a boy I used to build models too. I don’t know if people realize this, but models are not the real thing. Apparently the “scientist”, Jayanarayanan, or whomever created his “resumé does not know this either.

Modeling? A “scientist” is going to attach his credentials and scientific prowess to modeling? No, never would a real, honest, scientific scientist or researcher do that.

“Numerical” Is that numerical, as in counting? No, not even that. Numerical modeling? Would that be counting, measuring or collecting data? No, numerical modeling would be, either, picking numbers to make a model, or making a model and then counting the fabricated numbers. Either way numerical modeling is a big nothing.

Data would be the results of collecting, measuring, identifying in one way or another numbers from a real thing, not a model.

Numerical counting, not numerical modeling would be actually going somewhere, making observations and notes. When I built models of jets I did not go to the factory to participate in building a real jet. I modeled at home, at the kitchen table. “Numerical modeling? That sounds like sitting at the kitchen table and playing “what if” games. What if I had a job that paid 50 dollars an hour and I worked 40 hours per week? Wait, what if I had a job that paid $200 per hour, and worked 10 hours per week? That numerical speculation sure turned into reality, for everyone. Modeling? Anti-counting, sitting at the kitchen table (or desk), pretending to design something based on absolutely nothing.

So, Jayanarayanan models numerics? Is that, like, taking a bunch of numbers, and arranging them in cool flower shapes or snowflake patterns? Models? He makes models of numbers? I made models of plastic. He makes predictions based on less than anything physical?

Do you see, people, how stupid, childish, and unintelligent these attempts to lie, by pretending to be smart, by throwing impressive words together in a sentence, are? Just that one lie, I mean line, shows a complete lack of scientific knowledge.

The next “Research Area” is, wait. What is a research area? Using scientific jargon would one call a research area, expertise or field? A real scientific paper or resumé would list degrees and certifications. A PhD, for example, in Physics would read, PhD, Princeton, 2017. Papers published would be clearly referenced. One who adds irrelevant or unrelated words to create pseudo impressive titles and longer terms is assuredly trying to deceive.

One of his accomplishments is that he was “declined” 13 years ago? What kind of relevance is someone trying to fabricate? How is declined an accomplishment, relevant or impressive? It is not impressive to scientists. It is a joke to real scientists.

To augment my argument that this ozone speculation is nothing more than theory, further down the page under “Publications: 2015 -2016”, we read the first on the list, “Variability in Antarctic ozone loss in the last decade (2004–2013): high-resolution simulations compared to Aura MLS observations by Kuttippurath, J., Godin-Beekmann, S., Lefèvre, F., Santee, M. L., Froidevaux, L., and Hauchecorne, A. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 10385-10397 (2015)”

If you read this line of “Publications:” did you notice the word “simulation”?

Jaya…, whatever has a credible resume of speculation and declined awards, based on simulation. Jaya’s “Publications” section is nothing but a lot of sophist, deceptive, manipulation. But, wait for it, the big nail in NASA’s, NOAA’s and Jaya’s coffin is still to come.

I would bet my Corvette Stingray, that Jayanarayanan has no idea he is even on that resumé, or associated with that bogus study. I’ve checked NOAA, IPCC, and NASA for their so-called scientists. I have tried to contact numerous “scientists” and never has one replied or proven to have a research paper accredited to his name.

The next “area” is “Physical Oceanography” What is physical oceanography? Why does oceanography have to be physical? Is there non-physical oceanography? Yes, we call it speculation, modeling, fabrication and make believe.

Would we call non-physical oceanography, theoretical oceanography, model oceanography? Is physical oceanography just simply, oceanography? Why the pretense and sophistication at science? 

The next “area”, “Climate Change and Climate Modeling”

Modeling, again? What is climate change?

We, normal living-in-reality people call climate change, climate. Realistically, considering climate is change, measurable changes in variables associated with the weather and environment, then climate change, as the global warmers call it now, is “change in weather and environment variables change”. Global warming and “climate change” is just plain stupid from the very foundation!

If temperatures, precipitation, and hours of sunlight did not change, it would not be climate. Climate is change in variables. Climate is following seasons and all kinds of cool, measurable variables: CLIMATE.

What is “Atmospheric Chemistry”?  Do we call atmospheric chemistry, just atmospheric change, as in climate? Why the repetition?

The whole profile is one pretense after another.

In response to a fleeting thought I had, I did a search for Meteorological PhD. The search returned a number of results, I picked one for a well known university, The university of Arizona,

“Program/Degree Atmospheric Sciences (PHD) Program Description. The Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree is primarily a research degree. The candidate must complete at least 36 units of graduate course credit in the major field, including a core of 6 units of dynamic meteorology and 6 units of physical meteorology.”

Notice the very distinct wording, It is a Doctor of Philosophy program, and a degree in a faculty of Atmospheric Sciences. 36 units of study are required, 6 in the major field, 6 in physical meteorology. Does anyone see goofy wording, such as one finds in Jayanarayanan’s profile?

See how succinct and descriptive all the words in that brief online description are. A “Doctor of Philosophy” in a specific discipline, is mentioned quite clearly.

Again, what is “Numerical modeling of Ocean and Atmosphere”? It is not measuring, collecting data or science in the least. What is it, then?

The big exposé, however, will soon follow.

I like to spend time on the minutia sometimes just to show how childish, silly, unintelligent and manipulative these articles and global warming buffoons are. 

What is a “NASA Post”? What is a doctoral fellowship? Is a doctoral fellowship a doctorate degree? This might be a little unconvincing but try the next part of that point, “JPL/NASA. What does Jet Propulsion Lab have to do with this guy? Wait for it: nothing. It is admitted right up front in the remainder of that “Research Area”, “Caltech, California, USA (declined). 2007. Does declined mean  rejected and ‘did not happen’? So Jayanarayanan was offered a fellowship that was declined? Does this ‘nothing happened’ mean it could have happened except that somebody or something did not offer or did not complete the offer? Maybe Jayanarayanan declined because he wanted to pretend to have a fellowship and wanted to inform everyone he has no expertise or training in JPL/NASA. Not only is this whole thing very unprofessional; not only is the whole thing terribly communicated, but it is so childish one must wonder what grade the creator of Jayanarayanan’s profile finished in public school. Who would be so stupid to make a declaration and then admit “declined”? So, what is the award? Is the award boasting of yet another failure?

We have new information, propagated by the dumbest cheaters of congress today, AOC and a few other morons, that the earth is going to be uninhabitable in 12 years (11 by now). Is her information garnered from “articles”, numerical models and declined credentials from other sources? Yes, this is all the global hoaxers have. All that exists for the liars and cheaters of global control is fabrications, unscientific bravado, and silly childish gibberish. All the attempts to bring the masses to compliance to a global system of taxation and fear, is based on stupidity of a declined fellowship of no consequence, from 13 years ago. In this case, the pretentious science is 13 years old.

I personally like the next comedy sketch. It is so science-ignorant it is not funny. The next “award” is a CNRS Post – Doctoral Fellowship. Did Jayanarayanan get the fellowship? The “award” is so poorly written it reeks of terrible childish, grade-school writing skills. If it truly were a French Award” from a French institution of higher learning, one would expect consistency in the title of the award. The whole name of the university is in English, except for one word in French. Centre is French for center. Somebody knows very little French but thought to try to trick you, dear readers, that this is an institution with some prestige because one word is French.

In French it would be Centre Nationale Recherche Science. According to Jayanarayanan’s profile it is a fellowship for first post-doctoral study. That claim does not coincide with the claims of the “Centre”. Jayanarayanan’s claim is not an accomplishment. If it were it would read something like, Doctorate degree in…

A grant of money to do something may have been “declined”, rescinded, or the dude, Jaya….whatever, probably did not finish. Maybe he did not start. No matter the circumstances, nothing has come of it, making it a nothing, again a pretentious claim.

The biggest evidence of stupidity and non-science is the, “UGC – N ational E ligibility T est L ectureship. Is someone trying to be stupid or confusing? Is someone actually so stupid they cannot check their own work to correct major typos, or are they actually trying to be stupid? Can someone tell us what award it is Jaya…..whatever received when he received an award for being eligible for a test lectureship? What on earth is a test lectureship?

How far removed from any lectureship of an undisclosed topic is eligibility for s test of a state (ship) of an undisclosed lecture? This is a nothing of a nothing of a nothing.

What is UGC? Is it University Grants Committee? Did Jaya….whatever receive a grant, and for what, nothing? Or, as it sounds, he did not receive a grant for nothing.

I could further dissect the silly, sub-standard, mostly incoherent profile and pretentious works of Jayanarayanan but I will move on to other work.

I looked at the CNRS site and found more fabrications from nothing, and again, childish writing and understanding. Eventually I will dissect the simple words of the “missions” of that site.

Until then, I plead with you, dear readers, believe nothing, not even my words in any and all articles and commentaries I write.

Exercise your minds, please. Do more research of Jaya…whatever’s apparent professionalism. Pick a sentence or headline of the profile, break down the words and research the statements for yourselves. Find, for your own mental expansion, the contradictions and silly manipulative attempts found in every sentence and claim of the profile. I must inject there is something very important missing from Jaya….whatever’s profile. He likes holding hands and long walks on the beach. How sweet, and totally unprofessional: another black mark of reality against the totalitarian, global oppressors and plunderers of mankind.

SCIENCE-CHALLENGED: “Melting of Greenland’s ice is ‘off the charts,’ study shows”

Science-challenged: “Melting of Greenland’s ice is ‘off the charts,’ study shows”

Astounding dem/lib stupidity, as usual, tries to trick you, dear reader. You have been classically conditioned to accept silly fabrications without critical thinking or deductive reasoning.

I am not trying to insult you, dear reader and fellow American.

Most people just want to live their lives, enjoy things and rely on experts to know and tell truth. This is the problem.

To steal and cheat, truth must be eliminated and or flip-flopped. Hence, today in spite of Constitutional bars, a man, not a crime, is being investigated.

How would you, dear fellow American, guaranteed rights before the law; how would you like being investigated when there are no crimes committed? Is that not a severe bastardization of OUR self-governing rule of law? You may need to study that, refer to some of my other commentaries. Reading the Federalist Papers and YOUR, OUR Bill of Rights would also give you great insight.

What is the surface area of Greenland? Nobody thought to mention that in their pseudo-scientific fabrication? Do these so-called scientists know? Did they bother to research that for their mathematical formulae?

Wait! What? Mathematical formulas? Did the scientists think to collect data and inject it into a formula, by their design, if none other is found, and make a cause-and-effect determination? This is science, but we don’t even see a formula, or reference to a formula, or a reference to data or collection of data or measurements. How far from science can these climate alarmists get? How lacking in the tools of science can these short story “writers” get?

What is the entire surface area of the world’s oceans? Hmmm, nobody thought to mention that? No data? Curious the global warming dimwits forgot that important variable.

How can they make a claim without knowing surface areas of Greenland and the oceans?

Estimates are that Greenland has a land surface area of approximately 836,330 square miles, compared to 139.38 million square miles of ocean. The ratio is 166 to one. It would take, therefore, 166 Greenlands to cover the world’s oceans.

Or it would take 166 feet deep of ice, not snow, melted and in the oceans to raise the oceans around the world one foot.

Considering that much of Greenland is NOT covered by ice, rather snow that melts in the spring and summer and is replaced in the fall and winter, the ratio is much higher because snow does not melt to water at a one to one ratio. Ice, does not melt at a one to one ratio.

Did the fake-science, science fiction writers of this science-retarded commentary find that information; that variable and reality interesting, if not paramount in considering all their goofy, dopey claims? Did they fail to think about that in advance (hypothesize)? Science thinks in advance and lays out all the variables, conditions, parameters for study, and then collects data and interprets it, creating an identifiable cause-and-effect relationship. The same is true of graphs. I will provide more on the fake graphs subsequent to this commentary. 

Did those morons think of what they were saying?

Setting aside the insults I throw at incorrigible liars who pretend to know anything, can anyone reading this, or any one of the pseudo-scientists involved in the “writing” of the article, explain how much snow and ice has melted and will melt? At current melting fates, how long will i take to flood the earth 23 feet, as the article claims? Wait! What? No melting rates provided, or determined, or guessed at? For every foot of water the world’s oceans rise it takes 166 feet of Greenland ice so a 23 foot rise in the oceans’ level requires 3,818 feet of Greenland ice, NOT snow. 

How could the, dare I say, science-retards, forget that catastrophic detail?   

Not a single variable, measurement, or shred of data has been produced in the absolutely bogus article. In fact, the article does not exist at the declared site: nature.com or in the magazine, “NATURE”, itself.

Show me I am wrong, please. Someone show me, and all of us, something that might represent a scientific measurement?

A theory; an hypothesis, always precedes scientific study but the scientific goons, the science-retards did not even have the scientific expertise or knowledge to try and fabricate a theory. That failure is like going to play hockey and forgetting all your equipment, especially the basic: skates.

By now I hope you realize that the world’s ocean levels rising 23 feet by Greenland melt-off, is an impossibility because there is not that much ice on Greenland, and because snow and ice do not produce an equal amount of water, by volume. Real variables could have been supplied, if the dimwits had any. Take for example, an average depth of snow and ice on Greenland in the summer and the same in winter. Go back 50 years and compare. What, no comparisons? See how void of science this is when the basics have not even been mentioned, foreseen, or contemplated.

Setting aside comparisons we could try another avenue. Average depth and density of snow and ice, multiplied by surface area, gives a volume of snow/ice, and melted this could give us a volume of water, divided by the ocean’s surface area to produce a raise in water level. Nothing even close.

How much of Greenland, in the winter, right now, is green? None? That is the truth.

How much more melt this year than last year? For science to exist; for scientific methodology to be employed, we would have to know the pre-test and post test. All we have from the writers of the study: not those who did the (non-existent) study; is that someone (maybe, according to a “writer’s” claim) did ice core drilling, after the fact, nothing in a pre-test. There is no record nor mention of pre-drilling depths of ice or snow. There can be no comparisons hence there can be no claims more or less has melted than before. There is no “before”. There is no “before” so there can be no “after”, making the claim that “after” is more, is a fake-science fabrication.

Are these dem/lib political goons so stupid they forgot that, and everything right down to the skates (and ice)? They are not even smart or knowledgable enough to know any of this process in the first place.

How could these “writers” not have pictures? Not a single picture? Just that exercise alone could show (maybe falsely manipulate others), to believe something, that maybe one of these liars went to Greenland. No pictures?

Nobody went.

It is a curiosity every reader should have wondered. One picture might have proven that Greenland is actually green, and yet the imbeciles; the science-retards (literally), could not provide one picture. Is it because there are none, because nobody went, or is it because somebody went to Greenland, and it was white?

These political goons are so bereft of science and logic, that in their own sub-intelligence, they could not foresee that a complete and total lack of hypothesis, data, and pictures would absolutely sink and scuttle their lies.

They are literally so ignorant they cannot imagine that the average American can see through the sub-intelligent morons’ lies.

With another cold winter ahead (announced on liberal “news” channels), record cold temperatures assaulting the northern Atlantic coast, leading to Greenland, one must surely wonder how this cold, repeat COLD, frigid, icy, dippy-doodle-itis unheat melts the massive (not massive at all) ice sheets of Greenland. Is the scientifically-backward-refrigerator-warming-stuff-effect, that the dem/lib/global hoaxing retards have claimed, in opposition to reality, actually melting Greenland ice?

In other words, again, setting aside the obvious, deserved insults the dem/lib political agents get, are the very cold temperatures of the Atlantic coast; colder than last ten years and colder than average; temperatures that only get colder as they move north, towards Greenland, somehow, magically, politically melting ice of Greenland?

How would anyone know when nobody has been there? We do not even have pictures of scientists standing in Greenland, in the middle of this fall (barely winter, or last spring-when there would have been no ice anyway) showing us green growth.

Nobody was there!

Perhaps that feeling, frigid, icy, cool, cold, record-breaking cold temperature along the atlantic coast, is a warm cold. Perhaps warm enough “cold” actually melts ice and snow. 10 degrees fahrenheit? No? It must be a new, politically-motivated, fake-science phenomenon. Democrat party/liberal media frigid cold melts ice. No? I am always amazed at how politics, dem/lib/bolshevik, centralized control-and-plunder-politics, changes reality, especially science. 

If dimwit dem/libs want to call 20 below zero, warm, does that actually melt ice? That must be the fake-science, “missing link, holy grail of global hoaxing, I mean “warming”.

How stupid can dem/libs be?

Nobody can be this stupid without trying. It is all a purposeful hoax, lie, scam, to get the masses afraid, manipulated and accustomed to living in ignorance so they can be exploited, Again, dem/libs create crisis, that cannot possibly exist, and then offer a political/tyrannical solution to a non-scientific, dem/lib/globalist nightmare.

But let us continue.

How much water is produced from melting ice, or snow?

Did the “study”, which is only a “writer’s” mention of a (non-existent) study, give any information about the type of snow that is, ta-da, mysteriously missing from Whiteland, I mean Greenland?

How deep is the acclaimed missing snow-pack? What is the actual, estimated snow/ice that has melted and how much water does it produce, or did produce? Remember, Whiteland, I mean Greenland, has not yet melted. This is all a “writer’s” regurgitation of estimated and computer generated fabrications and political science agents, that Whiteland’s, I mean, Greenland’s snow and ice is melting at an alarming rate.

What is that rate? No rate, no data, no measurements? That is political science, not real science! A government entity, the deep state or hidden dem/lib/bolshevik, non-governmental agencies, fabricates fear through corporations and offers partnership to force a political solution, is the definition of fascism.

Years ago, I estimated, by taking the surface area of the Arctic and Antarctic, and an average depth of ice and snow, and estimated the volume of water that would be produced should it all melt. I found records of seismic tests that showed depths of ice in both poles, and made an estimation based on a number of formulae.

Then I divided the surface area of all the oceans in the world and discovered the total from both poles would raise the world’s oceans about half a foot: six inches. That is the worst case scenario, but it is not happening.

And Whiteland, I mean Greenland, has a fraction of the ice and snow.

The dimwits have curiously forgotten scientific words; words that might be part of a formula or used to measure to produce data. Words such as snow-pack, volume, average or mean, temperatures, comparisons, control group, study group, variable, data, resultant and conclusion, are key factors in scientific research and study, and yet these dimwit dem/lib political hacks have refused to; have failed to understand the need to, enter the realm of science by exerting and employing these real exercises and terms. How utterly void and vacant of real science can anyone actually get! Nothing worse than these goons.

How does any of this explain that superlative idiot’s (Al Gore’s) claim that he saw fish swimming in the streets of cities of Florida, about 10 years ago, and the water, due to Whiteland, I mean Greenland, is still rising. I feel for Floridians, abandoning their homes and property to rising water levels. That 1/8th of an imagined, non-scientific inch must surely be difficult to contend with.

My heart goes out, to coin a pretentious dem/lib cliché, to all the Floridians who have had to leave Florida and move to cooler climes to avoid the oppressive heat and onslaught of water inundation.

Wait, Whiteland’s, I mean Greenland’s, ice, according to global hoaxers, I mean climate change scientists, melted a decade ago. Holy rat-crap, we are already drowned and dead, and don’t know it. Why did those global hoaxing, I mean global warming, political agents, I mean scientists, not tell us we were dead, I mean drowned, years ago? Why the conspiracy of silence? It’s pure evil. We are all dead and the global hoaxers, I mean global scientists, conspired to keep this serious reality from us.

Crap, think of the money I could have saved on food, all these ten years now, If I had only known I was dead. D’uh dopey me. LOL!

Wait, another important reality the fabrications, I mean studies, forgot to show.

While the north is in a deep freeze, record cold temperatures, according to dem/lib/political agents’ predictions, melt the white-stuff fastly, lol. No? I digress. I know, I should not mock the science-retards.

Record cold in the north follows a pattern we all know as, wait for it, it’s coming, patience; wait, the real scientific word is, seasonal.

So we have record white stuff-producing temperatures in the north, actually turning water to ice and snow, and to balance we have warming, or,….wait…..patience, melting in the south. This melting trend, happens almost every year, especially when temperatures get warm, and stuff, in the south pole area, land, places. Okay, I mock, again: dimwit dem/libs cannot even use correct terms they are so lacking in everything in reality. The morons could not even try to inject variables such as surface area, ice pack, density, seasonal change, and so much more. Again, how dumb can dem/libs get?

The seasons change. That is a reality even dimwit dem/libs should not have forgotten. Even though it happens so rarely; so rarely we can only count the seasonal changes four times a year, one would think dimwit dem/libs might have had two brain cells to synapse together to try and get around that reality, no matter the lies they might have had to fabricate. They are so inept they could not foresee they would need some real, tangible measurements, pictures, theories, studies, data etc.  So inept they could foresee they would need skates for their upcoming hockey game.

The morons could not even imagine what a scientist might write or pretend to have and/or know, so stupid and vacant of reality and brain power, they are. Unbelievable how science is so accurate, four seasons, four times a year, but the brain dead, dimwit dem/libs could not even imagine they might be standing in a deep freeze and wonder why the winter is so damned cold.

It is near impossible to describe the absolute imbecility of these dem/lib dimwits.

But, the point is that when it is the white-stuff producing season in the north, it is the opposite in the south, and when it is the white-stuff producing season in the south, Whiteland, I mean Greenland sometimes gets green.

I wonder if dem/lib political agents are color blind between green and white. Wait! White, or anti-black, as the anti-scientists call it, is not a color.

Global warming pre and post test measurements and data. Written 6/21/16

Global warming pre and post test measurements and data.
A real scientist would look at NOAA and the la-la-land liberal fabrications and ask, where is the pre-test? Where is the post test? Where is the control group or control data, and where is the test subject or data?
Did NOAA have satellite pictures back in 1880? Did NOAA take water temperatures in the middle of the Pacific ocean in 1880?
Why the pretense of comparatives? Is it an attempt to trick fools and drones into believing there was data to compare with, way back then?
NOAA admitted some time ago the data that scientists collected over a century ago was flawed. It was a theory, and is still just a theory. The standards and measures for lengths and temperatures is still the original standards, so how could the science have been flawed then?
If NOAA, and the fake NASA site claim the data collected 100 years ago is flawed, why did they adjust everything down? If there is a two percent to four percent margin of error (the standard in science) the data can be adjusted either way. Margin of error accounts for adjustments both ways. Real scientists would know that, and proceed with that scientific methodology, regardless of the outcome. Not so with NOAA. Why? Why does NOAA adjust only to their predetermined agenda? It must be a predetermined agenda otherwise NOAA would have employed real scientific methodology and treated data with a margin of error to correct for either deviance. They refused to do what scientists do.
Did NOAA have satellites in the 1880s, or did they send out a crew daily to measure the ocean surface temperatures in the middle of the pacific? That must have been one hell of a chain of row boats.
A chain of row boats, with the original standards and measures would have been much more accurate, being in the moment when the norms and standards were established, rendering the most pretentious scientific, liberal, political assault on science and technology in the future, moot.
The audacity of these moronic-sub-scientists to think they are more qualified to adjust the standards and measures today of those that made them scores and hundreds of years ago, is astounding.
Every time I go to the sites and check the claims (not even theories), of these buffoon dem/libs, I have to laugh.
It is like mickey mouse, a cartoon, writing a science fiction novel, and dem/libs guffawing and harrumphing when someone asks if the writer is a cartoon. “Oh no, he’s real, they claim, he’s a fact, its true that cartoons can come to life.”
How utterly moronic can these stupid dem/libs get?
And then the pigs, the slovenly mutts, flag, remove and criticize my posts. They attack and allow me, and truth itself, no defense. That is just sick. It is sick, psycho, liberal pseudo-science.
What do we expect from neanderthal scientists, measuring the heat of a volcano by jumping in? Actually they measure it by throwing someone else in, or convincing the ignorant masses to jump in for a free phone.
Morons, dem/lib dimwits, science-retards!

RE: “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” Originally written 6/21/16.

RE: “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.”
The following is my response to a post on craigslist in Salt Lake City, June 21, 2016.
In this post the “writer” plagiarizes NOAA with the title of the post and numerous claims throughout.
I write:
Show us the evidence.
What is a climate system? Is dimwit dem/lib talking about a “clime”, or maybe a weather front? These are real terms that reveal real science, understanding, and real knowledge, while “.warming of the climate system…” is at best a non-scientific construction of an alien-structured grammatical mess. Who, what, fabricated this poor collection of words and terms?
Do these dem/libs, fabricating goofy terms and words, think others will wet themselves and follow in line behind simpletons that cannot construct a rational thought?
What is a “…climate system”? What is, “Warming of the climate system…”? Climate is warming and cooling. This dem/lib is speaking in circles to confuse others, and dazzle unsuspecting readers with his/her/its sophistry (look it up).
Scientific evidence? How could there be evidence when there is no data? Where are the volumes and pages of lists of university studies by PHD students submitting their theses?
Where are the measurements, data? Evidence is non-existent without data and a measurement or two. Anyone can pick a topic, go to a library, look up in the indexes for studies done by PHD students on almost anything. This is cutting edge stuff. Anyone can go to the library, look up climate topics and find numerous studies showing the temperatures are dropping.
Suppose I make a claim to illustrate my superior knowledge.
“I know a yard is longer than a meter”, I state.
“How do you know?”, you ask. I reply. “I just know.”
You press, “how long is a yard?” I say, “pretty long, the evidence shows it.” You ask, “how long is a meter?”
I reply, “almost as long as a yard.” You think you have me so you ask me, “If you are comparing the two, how can you know one is longer than the other if you cannot actually compare them. How can you know anything about either measurement if you refer to no studies that compare them, and if you cannot define how long either is?” I reply, “I just know it, the evidence is there.”
Anyone, at this point would ask, “what evidence?”
Besides the fact that I would be dead wrong regarding a yard being longer than the meter, one could also note I totally rejected scientific methodology.
A meter is a full yard plus 3.6 more, MORE inches, making a meter longer than a yard. That is a comparison using a common standard of measuring, to compare the two. This qualifies as data applied. Using one or the other as a standard, and then comparing, would be considered data.
You ask me again, to explain the comparison between the two, and how I can make a comparison without actually comparing variables; without common measurements or data to compare. I reply, “scientific evidence for measuring the measure of a longer yard than a meter, is unequivocal.” At this point you realize you are talking to an uneducated, egomaniacal moron, just as we, the educated and honest conservatives try to communicate with dem/libs, living in “I am special in liberal la-la-land.”
Using an inch to measure two “systems”, and then comparing, we see that a meter is longer than a yard, but a dem/lib would argue against that, if it meant he or she could propagate government stealing from all to give to the dem/lib frauds and liars.
Where is the science? This pseudo-science, injected presumptions played as credible facts, from dem/libs, is almost laughable.
Where is the data? Where is the hypothesis, the theory, the study parameters and interpretations of data? Where is the comparative unit of measure? These things are real characteristics of real science, and the dem/libs haven’t even got a clue how far from real science they are. Lying has a way of making one stupid. In essence, as mom and dad taught us, dem/libs are only fooling themselves.
There is absolutely nothing credible from the bogus sites because everything is a fabrication.
Everything from liberals is just like my little brother, in third grade, “this guy I know…”, trying to fabricate credibility from a lie. Then he would ramble on to fabricate false truth and “science” to suit his goal, hoping to convince us to give him our money or whatever he wanted.
Notice too, that NOAA is a .gov entity. Government is part of this? Now there is a source for total dishonesty. Why do dem/libs pick and choose which lies from government they want to believe? Are dem/libs so lost in la-la-looney science land that they think it is okay for government to lie as long as it is only lying to conservatives and smart people? The average democrat is at least 10 IQ points below the average republican. Democrats have the uneducated Mexican/muslim vote to factor in their averages. I rest my case.
The fact is that more republicans graduate than democrats. How many Mexicans, do you know, that graduated from college? Do you know just one? The big fraud the democrats proffer is that Mexicans, invaders and the dregs of mexico, work hard, vote, and are recipients of higher education. Such stupidity, claims connected by nothing except dem/lib lies, is hilarious.
Mexicans in college? How is that possible when the morons cannot even speak English? Who is more ignorant, the Mexican or the dem/libs that persist with bogus claims that are so easily refuted a third grade Mexican him or herself could refute the “lies”?
Remember this and you will know the liberal/progressive/fascist mind: they always want something for no contribution of their own but boast of two things: what they plan to contribute and what they plan to force others to contribute.

ICE CORE SAMPLES AND STUDY

Regarding a post on Craigslist, on or about October 3rd 2016, my post is as follows:

RE: “For sloppy-brent…”, and “Ice Core samples”.

Wow, that’s a tough one. Ice core samples from 650,000 years ago. Whew, tough. How does utatrdia know? Is it possible, just on the outside chance that this is just a theory? Just musing to myself, just wondering. Does the “study” start with a theory, an idea, a hypothesis (like all experiments), a reference point? Does the study or experiment include a margin of error (like real science does)? A standard margin of error is usually 2 to 4 percent.

Does the author state it as fact or theory?

Who took the ice core samples? Name the scientist and his or her study. NOTHING?

Come on, please, tell us what scientist went to the arctic or antarctic, drilled and took measurements. How deep did he or she, said scientist, go?

Where is the data?

So much constipation of data and reality in this “study”, as usual. One easy argument against is that a two to four percent margin of error is 13,000 to 26,000 years. That is an amazing discrepancy. However, going back so far, by estimating the accuracy of a machine that measure guesstimates, theories, of hundreds of thousands of years, the margin of error would be greater. Any scientist worth anything closely related to credibility, would proffer voluntarily, that his or her experiment or study would include a much higher margin of error, perhaps as high as 10 percent. In this pseudo scientific report that would be 65,000 years. With that margin of error, based on speculations of measuring long-gone time, it is hard to say anything accurately about the so-called data and conclusions.

When has a fabrication from that moron utardia ever been difficult for me to refute? When have I ever failed to expose dem/lib fraud and lies? When have I ever been intimidated or caught telling even one lie? The bolshevik bonehead traitors don’t even try.

Hmmmmm. I could go on with the slaughter but I will just repost the crap-kickings I already handed that lying bolshevik moron, utarda/whatever.

thirdoptbybrent/publius 3,217, utardia/star-twit/editor-predator 0

What a loser!

TO DELUDED DEM/LIBS, COOL CHARTS AND GRAPHS MAKE DEM/LIB FAIRY TALES SCIENCE AND RELIGION

To deluded dem/libs cool charts and graphs make dem/lib fairy tales science and religion

Fabrications with inflated numbers also do the trick, dem/libs think.

Love that graph of water and vapor and stuff and there, at the top of the page, a star for the Louisiana flood. Very scientific. I drew a graph. I had a star and some cool lines, and x and y projections. Do I sound dem/lib science-ish? Is that all it takes to impress loser libbies?

I made a graph and showed three circles of intersecting stuff, with the title: Global intersections against time frame compartments. Sounds cool, huh? Then I added some text below. “The consensus, according to this chart, shows temperatures are cooling globally”. Then I lied about what Pelosi said and added, “see, global trends show cooling”.

Because I want to sound science-ish, all I have to do is fool myself and my resultant, pretentious credibility should be convincing for others: after all, I am a good actor.

Acting, is everything.

Next lesson: how to pretend to be a doctor by carrying a scalpel and speaking medical language. Repeat these words: I looked at your charts and think we should try a new drug.

My fellow Americans, a scientist DOES science. A scientist does NOT sit in a room with a green wall behind him or her, and regurgitate “weather”. 

99 percent of global hoaxers are NOT in a laboratory.

They are NOT in a laboratory setting.

They are NOT doing studies.

They are NOT doing research.

They are NOT measuring anything.

They are NOT standing at the shoreline with a pen and clip board.

They are NOT at either pole taking temperatures. Nobody is at either pole except for military personnel. The poles are off-limits to civilians.

The 99 percent global hoaxers are NOT taking notes.

They are NOT doing experiments.

They are NOT looking or observing.

99 percent of global hoaxers are not even sitting in rooms with other weathermen (posing as scientists) and deriving consensus on anything.

They are NOT doing science in any way, shape or fashion.

99 percent of global hoaxers do not know they are global hoaxers.

There is no community of global scientists. They are not science-ing anything and they are not compiling notes, taking notes, or even thinking of taking notes.

They have nothing to measure or take notes for, and they do NOT even have a reason, a cause, and theory, or hypothesis to use a note to remind themselves to take notes. They do NOT have funding for anything. and so they get jobs and work at jobs.

There is no global science community. It is a fabrication that grows and shifts according to the propaganda needs of the moment. 

They are NOT sitting in committees convening or consensussing anything.

They are not going to conventions, doing online work. They are NOT trading notes because they have none. They are not thinking of trading notes they might have, if they ever did anything science-ish.

99 percent of global hoaxers are doing NOTHING even remotely related to science.

But here is the pièce de résistance: 99 percent, maybe 100 percent of global hoaxers are not, NAAAAAWT connecting observations to claims: empty or just fabricated. To describe the deep fraud of it all, “climate scientists” can be seen in many places, doing all kinds of observing but we never see one, NEVER see a single “climate scientist showing results of the effects of the observed causes. We never see “climate scientists showing connections, math, for example. We never see “climate scientists” showing the orocess that connects a mountain of observations with a black-hole of effects, claimed or referenced. There is no science where there is not scientific method. Scientific method includes, hypothesis, procedures, variables, formulae, isolation of a variable for measure, pre-test and post test, control group or control element, and collation and interpretation of data, among a few other aspects.

Observation and claim, all there is to “climate science” is grotesquely inadequate in determining if an ant farts or the moon is made of cheese. Child-id morons, all those who pretend to present science, or think they are presenting “climate” anything.

They have degrees in fields related to acting, figure skating and entertainment, but they are not doing science. They are being used. They work at jobs and it is a popularity contest: NO SCIENCE, NOT A SHRED

Welcome to dem/lib “science”.

RAND PAUL BELIEVES THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL

RAND PAUL BELIEVES THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL

Rand Paul Believes that climate change is real.

So what?

I believe that climate change is real too. I woke up this morning and noticed it was not 10 degrees, like it was January 10th, 2015. Do dem/libs also believe in time change? I woke up this morning and the time was different from when I went to bed. Observation makes science, to dem/lib  simple minds

I wonder, Do libbies weigh themselves before taking a crap and after, compare numbers, and call it weight loss?

Change is inevitable. But what is NOT inevitable is that mankind adjusts. On the history channel it was stated that the earth has been in a warming trend since the last ice age. Is that because neanderthal and homo habilus automobile emissions started warming the earth?

My gawd, how irresponsible and childish is it for “writer” to make such a stupid claim that Rand Paul “believes in climate change”. Did “writer” clarify? No, “writer” made a statement, a portion of another’s words, totally out of context, and then added his/her/its fabrications based on presumed credibility.

Maybe “writer” could tell us how Rand Paul, or anyone could NOT believe in climate change when he sees the seasons change.

I too believe in weight loss, after a crap. I even submit an environmental impact report after every crap. The trend is that after every crap I lose weight. This must mean I am in a weight loss trend. Funny how weight loss translates to an extra ten pounds every year. But, it is weight loss because I only look at observations I want to see, excluding all other variables and data I consider useless because the trend is that I WANT to tell people I have been losing weight. Are libbies that dishonest, or that stupid?

Take a 10,000 year warming trend and identify data that would isolate the cause of the effect. That would be the scientific method of proving or disproving an hypothesis. What variables have the liberals isolated with a logical explanation? NONE? The “scientists” have not even identified the variables they wish to observe, study and measure. The fundamental beginning of a scientific study or experiment is not known, much less understood, in dem/lib global hoaxers’ minds. What data, from 10,000 years ago, was collected and observed?

Ask that one scientist, Joe, the guy that was in a picture with another guy, John, at the IPCC convention (where they are told what to think, and are given absolutely no data. John was the janitor and Joe the principal of the school where they covered the school sign with IPCC.

The dem/libs provide no deep explanation, only fear mongering and unified lies. But wait, we have been in a cooling trend for 20 years. That is a fact. Did we not just have 15 states in the northeast and midwest report unusual cold and snow in April?

15 states report record cold, longer and later winters, more snow, and that is, magically,  global warming. Isolated variables? Not even identified much less observed and measured. Colder than average for a longer than average winter adds immensely to the dropping average temperatures locally, regionally and across the country. Did dem/libs “forget” to be scientific or did they refuse? Either way, it reveals their agenda is NOT, absolutely not, science.

So what if Rand Paul believes in climate change? What change does he “believe in”? Does he believe in climate changing from morning to evening? Does he believe in pollution causing polar bears to swim far distances? Oh, they already do that.

I doubt that “writer” presented the truth anyway. He/she/it, altus/bolshevik-dick/utardia, whatever and whomever, never presents all the facts; never presents the truth of who said what; never presents all the variables; never gives a correct representation of what he/she/it refers to, and certainly never isolates cause and effect; and cannot present any data because there is none.

There is no evidence for anything except computer generated estimates, that haters of mankind and science fabricate.

So, without even looking, I can tell that dimwit libby “writer” is lying.

You, my fellow Americans, can look for yourselves. You, my dear fellow citizens can look at any claim any liberal ever makes, that favors government intervention, regulation, registration and control. You can determine for yourselves if all the variables are included. If not, it is a test with a higher margin of error than margin of credibility. Without data the margin of error is infinity while the margin of reality is non-existent. Welcome to dem/lib la-la-land.

Why do these frauds lie to YOU, me? What line, factor or qualifier did lying liberal misfit “forget” to include? What variable or factor, or end of sentence did libby lout conveniently dismiss because it did not fit his/her/its agenda?

What is the liberal agenda, anyway?

The minority, liberals and democrat political elitists, want more than their share. How do we know this? They want their minority voice to rule above the voices of the majority. History refers to this as tyranny, monarchy, communism, fascism and other forms of elitist rule. It is no small matter that small groups reign over the masses. It is extremely significant, as the history of every country, nation, and community reveals that most humans will live off the labor of others (see Frederick Bastiat, The Law). America is no different. In every community, state or nation there are always those that will exploit others.

It is one thing to forcibly enslave others, quite another thing to lie and mislead others to a docile acceptance of a comfortable yolk.

This comfortable yolk, as history always proves, never stays comfortable. Proof is right before us, irrefutably part of the fabric and history of the struggle for freedom of the great American Constitutional Republic.

The democrat party is this machine of fraud and deception, to lead Americans, the vast majority, to a comfortable slavery. We are already in a form of comfortable slavery but those with no qualifications (democrats and liberals) “believe” they should have the reins of reign. Liberal lies start right at home. Liberals tell themselves they deserve more because they have something better in their characters. Usually it is the inane idea that because they do not “need” a god, they are inherently better, and “nicer”. The irony, incidentally, is that they work very hard to destroy god for others, in their own minds, and think the reality is proven by their imaginations. By this consideration they are less than human.

I, myself am atheist, but do not belittle other’s beliefs, unless the beliefs are fraudulent and exploitive, such as liberal, democrat party religion.

The core, the foundation of the democrat party is fraud and exploitation. The democrat party intends to rule the majority, as an elite group of smarter, evolved beings, that are actually dumb and de-evolved to instinctual, animalistic behavior. Witness for yourselves, my dear fellow citizens, quick tempers of liberals to attack conservatives and republic minded citizens with cruelty and open hatred because their fake superiority; their lacking superiority does not magically, unquestionably win discussion or arguments. They lose because they are inferior.

The reason for the hatred is not apparent. Every day on Craigslist some fraud, an agent of tyranny, or mutt-mind attacks me with no reference to a crime, offense or lie I have committed. I simply refute the lies of others, and refer to history and fact. Someone does not want history and fact known. Why?

So, this attack on myself, personally, is executed for no reason except that I express the will of We, the People (in the majority), and voice my opinion freely. Freedom of others without imposition by rulers, angers the liberals so much they want to shut me up. They always resort to cruel verbal assault, never a point to express the benefits of democrat party rule; never a point to show representation of those they intend to rule.

The cruel and unfounded attack on anyone that presents an opinion or desire related to individual and national freedom is reviled excessively, because it counters democrat party agenda: deceive and mislead to impose dictatorial rule, upon the masses, beginning with comfortable slavery.

The liars must continually skirt their agenda, their so-called ideology because it opens doors of knowledge for the masses that have potential to expose the cruel, tyrannical efforts of the democrats and liberals.

I invite any democrat, liberal, or progressive; anyone to offer an argument with more than superficial promises they cannot keep. Please, someone show me the error of my ways. Reveal to me the economics of stealing more and more from the masses to give them more. Please, reveal to me how taking liberties from OUR guaranteed list of liberties, as found in the Bill of Rights, makes us freer, more responsible, better, kinder, or better off in any way. How does taking our liberties give us more liberty?

Show us, please; please present an argument that goes beyond empty, “…hope and change…”. Show us how democracy beyond its capacities of self-governing, makes America safer, more secure, healthier and wealthier. Wealth? YES. Independence is wealth. Wealth is independence. Wealth and independence is security.

The problem, to return to my point about comfortable slavery, is that it never stays comfortable.

History proves, every time, that ruler law and comfortable slavery always degrade to iron-fisted oppression, genocide, and war to eliminate internal strife.

The agenda of the democrat party is to establish itself as an unchallenged oligarchy, and reduce the masses to poverty. This assertion follows the natural flow of mankind’s tendencies.

Monopoly is always innate to survival. Monopoly is instinctual and cognitive. There has never been a ruler that did not watch his or her back for sedition and/or rebellion in close government ranks. How many hundreds, thousands, of rulers throughout history have reigned short terms and lives, ended by close administrators? Survival at the top requires removal of enemies, and potential enemies: monopoly.

The democrat party, liberals, progressives and lobby groups all want this monopoly for their own security. They care not what price others pay, or are forced to pay.

Others have learned from history, ignoring the success of the great American Constitutional Republic, that joining the side of the governing class, through the few means available, does increase one’s lifestyle and survivability. It is a fraud beyond compare that totalitarian rule benefits anyone except the few, literally a handful.

“Writer” mentions conservatives and republicans identify climate change, ”…is that everyone know(s) that climate change is a big lie put out by the liberals to save the planet.” 

Who believes climate change is a lie to trick We, the People into saving the planet? Nobody believes that but millions believe the dem/libs have lied to trick the masses into surrendering rights to a government solution for a fake science propaganda campaign.

“Everyone” does not know what “writer” hopes others will ignorantly accept as truth. Nothing, even dimwit’s sneaky attempt to reinforce a bogus verity by stating it sarcastically, has any conclusive scientific backing. At what point in this observation and science process do dem/lib, global hoaxers inject any science?

Mankind can adjust, and that is what self-governing is. Checks and balances, as found in The Constitution, individual freedoms and security as guaranteed in The Bill of Rights, and separation of powers for, believe it or not, individual rights and freedoms, are the only things keeping all equal before the law. There is no other equality.

What this means is that the dem/lib agenda is really no secret. All history, all evidence from past civilizations shows this degradation to tyranny. It is what the founding fathers spoke of, and for which they instilled checks and balances: checking government.

The liberal/democrat party agenda is as plain as the full moon. Look up, my fellow citizens, and see it for what it is. Compare it against the light of constitutional republic, the balance of individual rights and majority rule; the balance of federal tyranny and states’ rights; the balance of left-wing tyranny and right wing anarchy (the original delineations). Show us; reference any word spoken by a democrat politician that speaks of or defends any of the aforementioned individual guarantees and freedoms. 

What we see with liberals and the democrat party is that change is inevitable, but they constantly try to force change upon others: change they engineer and from which only they benefit.

Again, can a single liberal or democrat politician provide fundamental, principled historical backing for socialism being a beneficial institution for the majority of the citizenry of any country? Did ruthless Russian bolshevism/communism provide freedoms and leisure for Russians, or did it slaughter 30 to 40 million people? Did Maoist communism provide freedoms and security for the Chinese or did it eliminate approximately 60 million people?

More recently we witness the absolute degradation of Venezuelan life and civility because of the irrefutable failure of socialism forced upon Venezuelans. Venezuelans are eating their pets and zoo animals. An oil producing country cannot buy oil now.

Socialism is protectionism. Monopoly tries to protect what it has by continually destroying competition. In unchecked government it is called legislation.

Please, tell us how protectionism works in favor of both the masses and industrialists (see Bastiat, “What is Seen and What Is Not Seen”).

Some commentary with historical data, other than democrat party lies, would certainly help elucidate a cause and effect reason to be forced to social engineering at the hands of those that cannot elucidate an argument beyond hate, but the dem/libs avoid and must avoid all real communication, so no dissertation or elucidation to any degree will ever be forthcoming.

We don’t see Christians forcing their will on others. They coax, intreat, invite and send out missionaries to preach and teach. But there is no religious/political union to force and impose upon the masses as there is with the liberal, dogmatic, religious/political force.

Liberals, progressives, the whitehouse caliphate (Obama administration), and the democrat party proper all work and deceive, lie and fabricate to force change that benefits ruler law in the hands of the democrat party politically elite, at the expense of the masses.

Change is inevitable, but dem/lib/commies have no desire to contribute to mankind by changing themselves to work with others. They would rather force, upon others, controlled change with inherent exploitation.

One such forced change, with built in exploitation, for example, is federal taxation. Taxation, indubitably, is change. It changes the majority’s ability to survive by taking from the majority the fruits of its own labor, and giving it to the ruling minority that distributes based on the ruling minority’s needs: first and always foremost, themselves. This is the hidden fist of ruthlessness and ruler’s law in the democrat party regime. This is the warning conservatives, republic-minded citizens, specifically tea party representatives today, all the way back to our founding fathers, have tried to present to America, Americans, and the world.

We, the People, have control of the fist of ruthless rule, but we are unaware of the ruthless control of our lives that slithers its way into our lives. We cannot identify the pretenses or beneficence of the democrat party because the rhetoric and overwhelming promotion of pretentious just causes and dishonest means propagated endlessly by the democrat party and allies, eventually moves We, the People to relax our grip on ruthless rule.

Forced change, by deception, fraud, and fabrication, IS the democrat party; is democracy.

The change may appear to be comfortable, but it is currently only partially comfortable and cannot mysteriously get any more comfortable, except for the monopolizers of power and force. The liberal media lies about conditions constantly. But the greater danger is not that change is inevitable and that comfortable slavery could somehow, out of anyone’s control, degrade to oppression and genocide of Americans. The greater danger is that it is the very plan of those in the democrat party and their adherents and masters. It is their plan to monopolize power: to force poverty on the masses so that the masses cannot rise up in revolt, thus securing the political elite’s monopoly, wealth, and luxury.

This move to totalitarian control is no mystery. It is no fabrication or theory. These things are never mentioned by liberals, progressives, or democrat party politicos because it educates the masses to the democrat party conspiracy that intends to force America and Americans to total slavery.

As I have stated before, do not be afraid of this word, conspiracy”. It is a part of life. When two people talk about meeting at the mall and doing some shopping, they conspire. 

Part of the communication problem is that “writer’s” lie is complex. It does not represent a smart liar, rather an instinctual level of diabolical cognition. The “writer”, like most, if not all liberals and progressives, is animalistic in that he/she/it cannot exert human virtues and characteristics: faith, trust, and patience being three that separate conscionable beings from instinctual animals.

Show me, my fellow human beings, a part of “writer’s” post that reveals trust in my words from the perspective of historical truth? Can liberal maniac not admit, find a common point? Never has a liberal critic of my posts, “granted” me one point, one truth, or one fact. There is no compromise in animalistic, monopolizing: only total propagation of tyranny.

The truth of the Constitutional Republic, for example, is irrefutable, but the principles instilled place “writer’s” monopolizing desires in jeopardy, so the liberals never speak of Constitutional Republic, for example, in a truthful manner. They cannot allow truth to be attached to anything because truth reveals the dem/lib/bolshevik fraud.

A FOUNDATION OF MISINFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC AND HIGHER EDUCATION SUBJECT TO REVISION, COPYRIGHT 2018

A FOUNDATION OF MISINFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC AND HIGHER EDUCATION
SUBJECT TO REVISION, COPYRIGHT 2012, 
Edited September 3, 2018



On the Charlie Rose talk show, October 26, 2012, Pelosi stated, “The most important thing you can do for growth is to invest in education.”
 


In my opinion, the cliché of ‘investing in education’ is socialist dogma. It is propagated fraud and disingenuously passed for principle. Has anyone followed the bouncing dollar through education? Why does the public believe this cliché? In everything, follow the dollars.

Nancy Pelosi’s words, spoken like a true dem/lib raider of productive people’s resources and gains was not questioned by Chucky Rose. To allow lies to propagate is a crime against civility. Crimes that result in loss (taxes), eviction (IRS), Obamacare (genocide- have YOU read the 2700 pages?) are crimes against humanity. What is Chucky reporting? The dogma that education creates a civilized society has been dogmatized for over a century. Utah is one state that fought public education, and held out the longest. The law, wherein a few forced their decisions upon many that resisted, used force. Study the history of forced public education in America, read the dogma of “educators” and “leaders” and it sounds like communism propagating its wonderful, fake utopia.

Dem/libs know that any idea can be expanded, any fraud and lie can be expanded from a well established lie to more encompassing and overwhelming impositions. The dem/libs use this decalogue to expand their false ideas. The establishment media today is the well spring of accepted deception and organized theft.

Let us take a look at the dollar that is spent sending a child to university. Consider the expenses.

Consider savings by two working adults over 20 years, to send a child to a school of higher education, compared to spending the same amount on property and
Twenty thousand dollars spent on higher education is a loss, for the most part. When a trade of goods and services transpires something of value is exchanged. A purchase of a car for 20,000, for example, provides jobs for others, sends cash through an economy in a free market system that is NOT fraught with fraud or inefficiency, and it provides unquestionable benefits, one being ownership of property.



There is absolutely nothing produced by education, except taxation for costs, forced upon the public.

 Education is NOT efficient. Setting aside the real measures of education, there is no gain, no goods produced, and no exchange of goods and services. The education “trade in goods and services” is a sacrifice of real property for air, for thought, for a puff of smoke that provides nothing substantial, solid or useable. The same, so-called gains in education can be acquired by apprenticeship.



Apprenticeship is a long gone economic exchange. Today it has been replaced by mentor-ship: slave labor. Slave labor of mentorship has two aspects. One being the actual effort expended for the gains of the mentor, and the other more significant aspect, less noticed, is the required commitment to ideology where government controls the programs. Democrats and liberals use the mentorship program to a fuller political end than republicans. Dem/libs use mentorship to indoctrinate the young beneficiaries to further ideological/class slavery.

Make no mistakes about this reality of institution controlled by the dem/lib political machinery to gain forced volunteers. The systems are designed to infiltrate institutions for gains for people in office.

 Suppose all students that entered college graduated. How many sociologists would flood the market? Make no mistakes join this point either: it is a market. What jobs are available for sociologists? How many teaching, psychologist, economist, or nursing jobs are available to graduates? Higher education fills a much larger role than education.



The hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, math, engineering, biology, still produce more graduates, factoring in drop-out rates, than needed. Is that money wasted? Some argue yes, others argue no. Who benefits with student failure rates and why are these high rates not addressed and corrected? The education systems themselves require large failure rates to continue the pretentious necessity of higher education. The biggest gains of educational systems are for political provisions and, even greater gains are realized for the institutions themselves.

 Let us suppose a store owner hires someone to merchandise goods. There is a measurable relationship between hiring and profit. The same relationship does not exist in the education system. There is no profit relationship between hiring and profit. The relationship is totally internal. The profit gained by the institution is almost absolutely that which the student injects: that which the institution must exact and extract from the student. Furthermore, there is no tracking of gains the student makes when leaving institutions of higher education. If there were, I suspect, the fraud of institutional education would be exposed.



In fact I would add there is no value-added gains for higher education because there is no real competition and, hence, no way to make comparisons. How many engineers without degrees from higher education institutions can be compared to engineers with degrees? There is no available data to show engineers with degrees from educational institutionsIn earn more or less than engineers without degrees from institutions of higher education.



There is no measurable relationship between money spent educating a “worker” in any variety because the institutions have created a monopoly. The monopoly is always dangerous when forced to cooperate and “produce” under the aegis of government. We call this fascism and it is closely related to the same processes of communism. Some refer to it by a less auspicious title, socialism, as if there is some element of social production or gain. over a real free market system of meeting needs for specialists.



There is a unique profit from education: for those that knowingly or in ignorance exploit future “workers”. The biggest profits derive from direct exchange of money for education.



The house Mr. and Mrs. Jones mortgaged for a second time to pay for a chance of a 15% success rate in a business venture, is a bad investment. Welcome to higher education. The Joneses would never engage such a risk against real property

 Of course politicos will argue that education is paramount to the growth of the student. It is a lie upon which many arguments are won without challenge. Most money spent in education goes up in smoke. Most students are educated in systems but few truly learn.



Listen to Pelosi, Obama, and Jim Matheson and recognize the talk of commendable efforts to educate the youth are based upon unchallenged presumptions and economic fallacies. It is magic how classical conditioning sets morons free; free of reality and its consequences. But it does not.

 Is the debt quotient high with education, and to whom are the educated in debt? Is debt slavery or not?



The most destructive aspect is parents’ imposed responsibility, to the institutions of education, that appear as commitments to their children. These imposed commitments to institutions appear as commitments to children while they ultimately waste and squander resources, wealth and security. Why is a parent responsible for a child’s education? Who says, besides the bankers, educators and politicos, that spending real profit and fruit of labor on a child’s education is a valued parental responsibility? Who says, but the institutions that gain, that this imposed responsibility makes good citizens from foolish investments? Where is the connection? Non-existent.



Who gains, the student? No. Most money spent on higher education (including high school) is a waste. Why? Because learning is learning. Learning is NOT teaching. The best teachers receive no accoldaes or recognition when teaching rocks. Education has no real connection for students when it is disconnected by the fake morality of higher education, and worse when it is further disconnected by another’s payment. This IS why government wants to “help” students go to college. The loss and inevitable debt and disconnection to reality produces de-educated slaves and transfers wealth from parents for air, paper, and empty unfulfilled wishes.



Most money spent by parents, giving up real property, is worse than an investment loss. In all public education institutions the losses never measured are tragedies experienced in ways never mentioned.



The social, familial and mental disruptions and losses are not measured nor mentioned by the institutions, naturally.



Where do children learn about drugs? School. Where do children pick up diseases? School. Where do children acquire social maladies, such as cheating, lying, and anti-social behavior? School.



At best, 10% of graduates work in their chosen field of study. Who then, gains from money spent on a 90% chance of failure? In a real free market situation money parents set aside for their children’s education would not be considered investment capital. It is not spoken of as investment except in ethereal terms because of the manipulation of institutions and the establishment political ravaging that plagues Americans.



Even wild-cat oil drillers don’t invest with that poor risk of loss.

 Education, considering the overall numbers of invested students, and the poor successes following graduates, produces worse success rates. The hard professions, so few actually, have success in procuring work in the field of study, but it is such a small percentage of the population of students, that too is a dismal failure. How many new engineers, doctors, nurses, and dentists and a few other high profile professions successfully enter the workforce?



The word itself, “workforce”, is dogmatic, carefully established in every society, to describe and identify the sub-elite, the stable, non-moving non-political class of the tapped, tagged and taxed masses. Public education, in reality, entertains 99%. Who is the one percent? Are there connections to the rich one percent Obama speaks of? Absolutely.



Let us also consider the profession of teaching. There is nothing else so well devolved today that fails so purely (next to politicos and government agents) than teachers. Teaching is self-perpetuating, and a drain, producing little more than talk, air, and paper.



There is very little actually produced as a result of education, and less produced intrinsically in education. How is this a viable investment? Do we measure success by production or potential production? Who is education not subjected to the same standards of success that the “workplace” experiences?

 Next we must speak of the lies built upon this grass-roots fraud the dem/libs and most republicrats proffer.



Have we all heard ads and politicians speak of higher education being a parental responsibility? Who mentions this except those who gain financially? The question, then, follows, is it truly a parent’s responsibility to surrender real gains, profits and property for ethereal hope? How have come to believe this? Who placed in our minds and the pblic mind that it is the parents responsibility to pay for students faiklure?




Again, who gains? Banks, taking real cash in exchange for slavery, are the winners. Public liars (politicians) are always excited about creating dependency because it is slavery. It is organized, transfer of wealth to nothing, fostered by politicos, iconized by politicos, while it is the political class and their friends who line their pockets with collected cash that “should” go to real education.



Obama’s friends made a killing these last four years, and teachers that do nothing except sell false hope in exchange for indirect gains through forced volunteerism in the failing education market, acquire real property.



We must surely visit the issue of the how government “people”, hardly people in reality, have fastened chains, though unions and regulations, around the necks of all educators and their allies in the political class.


Has anyone ever though to question, check, or ask what percentage of ‘more education investments’ goes to paying for better educators? From where do we acquire this idea that the also acclaimed importance of ‘better skilled teachers’ deserves increases in education spending?

What skills do teachers have that others, including parents do not? I would argue the only skill that “better skilled teachers” have is information accessibility.



There seems to not only be a clear discrepancy in the taxation increases, promised for education, that actually gets to education, as opposed to the educators.



Some of the presumptions built upon education misinformation is that higher education makes skilled workers. Wrong! When so few graduate, we must look more at the failure rates that are absolutely, infinitely, more revealing about the poor investment results that affect vast majorities, as a result of failure to make skilled “workers”

 Apprenticeship programs have been with mankind since the dawn of time and have, irrefutably and unquestionably, produced skill.

 Boys working with fathers has transferred skill from generation to generation for millennia.


The fallacy sponsored by the political class and their allies in education, that education is good for an economy; that it produces growth, is far from the truth.

 There is economic growth in education and almost no growth from education in the work place or free market. An economy does not growth without real production.


The next argument dem/libs and con/repubs make for education is that it is a moral responsibility. How is a failure, a moral, in any way? How is taking trillions from Americans to give billions to a single player in the auto industry, fair and economically balanced? Apply the same to higher education and we see, irrefutably, that the political force and educational profession dwell and thrive in our failed education economy.



How can we witness education, and related industries somehow skirting the issue of economic failure? Why do we allow a political and educational class, a minority of overpaid blackmailers, to claim education is a moral duty to throw the masses’ property away for twisted hope of mass failure for the few the elite identify and promote?



What of the violation, mentally and financially of students themselves?

 Are we aware of the results of education: transfer of wealth, poor skill acquisition (reading, for example), poor communication skills forced upon students through social escapes, pregnancies and abortions that destroy the female conscience.

 There is much to be discussed, and much to be discarded regarding education and higher education.



A further investigation and dissection of the subversive efforts by change agents in the education systems, must be exposed. Look for further commentary regarding public and higher eduction.