Originally posted on NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT:

By Paul Homewood

tsgcos.corr.5.81.8.251.101.4.0.37

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/gcos_wgsp/tsanalysis.pl?tstype1=91&tstype2=0&year1=&year2=&itypea=0&axistype=0&anom=0&plotstyle=0&climo1=&climo2=&y1=&y2=&y21=&y22=&length=&lag=&iall=0&iseas=1&mon1=0&mon2=11&Submit=Calculate+Results

The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, or AMO, is an ongoing series of long-duration changes in the sea surface temperature of the North Atlantic Ocean, with cool and warm phases that may last for 20-40 years at a time and a difference of about 1°F between extremes. These changes are natural and have been occurring for at least the last 1,000 years.

It is known to have significant climatic impacts on the Northern Hemisphere. According to NOAA:

  • Recent research suggests that the AMO is related to the past occurrence of major droughts in the Midwest and the Southwest. When the AMO is in its warm phase, these droughts tend to be more frequent and/or severe (prolonged?). Vice-versa for negative AMO. Two of the most severe droughts of the 20th century occurred during the positive AMO between 1925 and 1965: the Dustbowl of the 1930s and the 1950s…

View original 504 more words

The Infantryman’s Arrogance

Posted: 7 Apr 2015 in Politics

1IDVET:

I am the Infantry.
I am my country’s strength in war.
Her deterrent in peace.
I am the heart of the fight…
wherever, whenever.
I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies.
I am the Queen of Battle.

Originally posted on The Steadfast Patriot:

Infantrymen have a pride and arrogance that most Americans don’t understand and don’t like. Even soldiers who aren’t infantrymen don’t understand. The pride doesn’t exist because we have a job that’s physically impressive. It certainly doesn’t exist because it takes a higher level of intelligence to perform our duties. It’s sad and I hate to admit it, but any college student or high school grad can physically do what we do. It’s not THAT demanding and doesn’t take a physical anomaly. Nobody will ever be able to compare us to professional athletes or fitness models. And it doesn’t take a very high IQ to read off serial numbers, pack bags according to a packing list, or know that incoming bullets have the right of way.

The pride of the infantryman comes not from knowing that he’s doing a job that others can’t, but that he’s doing a job that others…

View original 358 more words

Ruh roh Raggie,

Looks like the science ain’t so settled now is it.
And Obama continues to shove this lie down everyone’s throat with his executive actions.

 

Scientists Say New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria

A new study out of Germany casts further doubt on the so-called global warming “consensus” by suggesting the atmosphere may be less sensitive to increases in carbon dioxide emissions than most scientists think.

A study by scientists at Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Meteorology found that man-made aerosols had a much smaller cooling effect on the atmosphere during the 20th Century than was previously thought. Why is this big news? It means increases in carbon dioxide emissions likely cause less warming than most climate models suggest.

via New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria | The Daily Caller.

Originally posted on Mountain Republic:

Milwaukee sheriff points finger at president’s and attorney general’s race-baiting tactics

Sheriff Blames Obama Administration for Police Officer's Death
Adan Salazar | Infowars.com

Milwaukee Sherriff David Clarke weighed in on the death of a Boston police officer who was violently murdered on Friday, pointing to the real culprits who have been stoking the flames of racial tension and police hatred in America.

“The War on Police continues unabated. Obama, Holder, de Blasio gave it license,” Sheriff Clarke said in a Tweet yesterday.

On Friday Boston Police officer John Moynihan was shot to death at point blank range as he took part in a shootout in the suburb of Roxbury.

Moynihan’s was the latest in a string of police shootings that have seemingly increased in frequency since “social justice activists” were stirred into taking up…

View original 209 more words

Arm yourself with the knowledge that you are being lied to constantly from the media, the Democrats and anyone with a collectivist mindset.
Wake up people.

How To Untangle Orwellian Doublethink: 4 Secrets To Help You Spot BS

Even very smart people can be tricked by some of these terrible techniques…

In order to control millions of people, totalitarian or proto-totalitarian governments find it necessary to somehow prod their subjects into accepting that which is not true. Intelligent people will naturally see the truth and thereby comprehend when government lies to them – and so that’s the rub – how does totalitarian government deal with intelligent people when they must be lied to?

George Orwell provides the answer: intelligent people must be conditioned to reject self-evident truth, to reject the sanity of common sense, to accept the insanity of Orwellian Doublethink, to accept the lie and the truth in their minds simultaneously: “with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”

How do Dictatorships lie to intelligent people and get away with it?

1. In the early stages of totalitarianism the use of Orwellian Newspeak is preferred to blatant, in-your-face lies because Newspeak (otherwise known as Doublespeak) is the clever manipulation of words which mean one thing to the speaker and something very different or its opposite to the listener, thus one may plant a false idea into another’s head by lying to them directly, or by using the tricky technique of Doublespeak.

via How To Untangle Orwellian Doublethink: 4 Secrets To Help You Spot BS | PJ Lifestyle.

Good article.
Political correctness liberal stupidity that is swallowed hook, line and sinker at your local university.

Political Correctness: The Progressive Political Strategy

By Norman Rogers

Is there a bigger collection conformist drones than the tenured professorate of American universities? Tenured professors have lifetime guarantees of employment granted for the specific reason of protecting them from retaliation when they speak out on controversial subjects. Yet they are, by and large, terrified of even minor transgressions of progressive orthodoxy, otherwise known as political correctness. Granted, they do have reason to be afraid of stepping over politically correct lines. They won’t be paraded through the campus with a dunce cap while being pelted with rotten eggs, but they can be shunned, tried in a kangaroo court or fired. Universities may have totalitarian impulses, but they don’t have the enforcement tools that real totalitarians have. Harvard doesn’t have a forced labor camp in the forests of Maine. If a small percentage of professors stood up against political correctness it would melt away very quickly.

Political correctness is defined by dictionary.com as “marked by or adhering to a typically progressive orthodoxy on issues involving especially ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or ecology.” For example, if you want to be politically correct, you cannot use ethnic or gender stereotypes, or suggest that gay marriage is a bad idea. When Larry Summers, then the president of Harvard University, timidly suggested as a hypothesis to explain the underrepresentation of women at the highest levels of mathematics that women may perform less well in math than men, he was quickly out of a job. Suggesting that men and woman are emotionally or intellectually different is prohibited by political correctness. If a mob of young blacks attack pedestrians, or robs a store, in the politically correct media they become unruly teenagers of no particular race. If you criticize the computer models that predict a global warming disaster you are depicted as an ignorant climate denier.

via Articles: Political Correctness: The Progressive Political Strategy.

In case you missed it, I thought y0u should catch up on the global warming scam.
Happy reading…

 

By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Assertions and Creditable Evidence: This week, the movie, Merchants of Doubt, was released, which claims that certain scientists were in the pay of tobacco companies, etc. without advancing credible evidence. These scientists had the audacity of challenging that human emissions of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming. Of course, warming has stopped even though emissions continue to increase and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) continues to increase.

The movie is based on a book of the same name by Oreskes and Conway, which offers no credible evidence showing that the four scientists, including SEPP Chairman, Fred Singer, were paid by tobacco companies.

Without a causal mechanism, establishing that inhaling hot cigarette smoke was the primary cause of lung cancer was a difficult, statistically debatable process. Initially, many possible causes were considered, including replacing dirt roads with asphalted roads. The work by Sir Bradford Hill, and others, is laudatory.
There is no question that tobacco companies used unscrupulous means to attack the credibility of the researchers. This is well documented. Today’s issue centers on claims that anyone who questions the rigor of the statistical work supporting a politically popular cause must be using similar methods as the tobacco companies did – guilt by association. Fred Singer, who does not smoke, had the audacity of questioning the claim that second-hand smoke causes cancer. The claim is extremely weak, and far below any standard statistical threshold. For this, he was attacked in both the movie and the book as receiving money from tobacco companies, without any credible evidence supporting the claim.

These efforts illustrate how politically motivated persons will label those, who criticize the lack of rigorous science supporting a politically popular cause, as anti-science, or as paid by third parties. That scientists, and once highly-regarded scientific institutions, join this effort demonstrates the general lowering of standards of acceptable scientific rigor.

Fred Singer has challenged the producer of the movie for evidence. Ken Haapala is asking those who give it positive reviews to please provide credible evidence supporting claims that Singer were financially supported by tobacco companies. Of course, there is none. In fact, during his 25-year service as president of SEPP he received no salary or fee income whatsoever. Further, SEPP does not solicit support from corporations or government.

There may be a silver lining in the release of the movie. It comes at a time of increasing popularity of courtroom drama and crime shows. These are educating the viewing public that hearsay and rumor are not credible evidence. Some members of the public may begin to question the claims in the book and the movie that fail to produce credible evidence as hearsay and rumor. Who knows, they may begin to ask the same question about claims that human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming? See links under Communicating Better to the Public – Dream Evidence Up.

You can read the rest here:

http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2015/TWTW%203-7-15.pdf