Obama: The poor gotta stay poor

Warm periods

Above is a nice reconstruction of historical temperatures, and in it I see two things: One, obvious to all, is that it is good to be alive during a warm period. Two, if you look closely, there is a downward trend with the peaks. I’ve sent away for a book on this and will address it later when I understand it better, but as explained to me in a way I did not quite comprehend, our planet enters and leaves the spirals of the galaxy at regular intervals of 350 years or so, and when that happens, we cool off. You can see by the bottom of the Little Ice Age that we might soon be entering a cool period, the prediction given as 2030. How severe – no one can say. We have a great tool, however, if it happens: Hundreds of years of fossil fuels available to us.

The hockey stick

This, of course, is the famous Michael Mann Hockey Stick. It is trash, propaganda, and the people behind it know it is those things. What they are selling is something completely apart from anything having to do with science or climate. That is why they are so boldfaced in their lying and hand wringing – facts do not matter. They are shown to be wrong about everything at every turn. (Heartland Institute in July did their 13th Annual Climate Conference – this link will provide several hours of very interesting video.)

It doesn’t matter. None of it matters. Of course the scientists who spoke at the Heartland Climate Conference are right. Of course the people pushing the climate alarm agenda are wrong and even lying.

This includes Bill Nye, Science Guy, who recommends jail sentences for skeptics. He’s not serious, of course, but underlying such rhetoric is a free-for-all button. He is allowed to say anything that crosses his mind without repercussions. There are no holds barred in this propaganda campaign. Thus do we have predictions of the end of snow, the flooding of the Florida Keys, New York City underwater, oceans turning acid, massive droughts and fires, polar bear extinction. None of it happens. Alarmists merely go on to new predictions.

Here are some quotes I have run across in my reading on this subject:

“Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” (Takeda Kunihiko, vice Chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology research at Chubu University in Japan)

“Al Gore and the UN climate boss Yvo de Boer tell us the world needs to go on an energy diet. Well I have news for them. Africans are already on an energy diet. Were starving! Al Gore uses more electricity in a week than 28 million Ugandans used together in a year. And those anti-electricity policies are keeping us impoverished. Telling Africans they can’t have electricity and economic development – except what can be produced with some wind turbines or little solar panels – is immoral. It is a crime against humanity. Hypothetical global warming a hundred years from now is worse than this?” (Fiona Kobusingye)

“Germany spends 110 billion to delay global warming by 37 hours. The Germans are spending about 110 billion on subsidies for these solar panels. The net effect of all those investments will be to postpone global warming by 37 hours by the end of the century. For every dollar spent, the EU stands to avoid about $.10 of damage.… Over the course of the century, the ideal EU policy would cost more than 7 trillion, yet it would reduce the temperature rise by just .05°C and lower sea levels by a trivial 9 mm.” (Bjorn Lomborg)

“I believe climate change denial is a form of mental illness.” (Alec Baldwin)

This one, however, from Obama in 2013 to a South African audience, is the most revealing: “If everybody is raising living standards to the point where everybody has got a car and everybody has got air conditioning, and everybody is got a big house, well, the planet will boil over – unless we find new ways of producing energy.”

“Unless we find new ways of producing energy” states the agenda clearly. Even as CO2 does no harm to us and only barely causes any perceptible warming, Obama says the poor, they gotta stay poor. That is climate change in a nutshell.

This last one is just for shits and giggles. If Al Gore seems to you, as he does me, a big doofus, well, think about this, from Warren Buffett’s Vice Chairman Charlie Munger, speaking to a group of investment managers, paraphrased by Marc Marano outside of actual quote marks:

Gore is “not very smart” and “an idiot” but was still able to amass a personal fortune in the investment world. “Al Gore has hundreds of millions [of] dollars in your profession. And he’s an idiot. It’s an interesting story. He’s not very smart. He smoked a lot of pot as he [coasted] through Harvard with a gentleman’s C.”

PS: You know what? I forgot why I sat down to write this piece in the first place. My wife and I were discussing the first graph that shows warm periods, which is based on Greenland ice cores. I mentioned to her that it is a shame such information is not spread more widely, but that most Americans don’t know how to read graphs. Further, Facebook, where most people go for news these days, does not offer enough column width to make a proper display, and because it is a rat-a-tat medium anyway, most people do not stop to read anything longer than one or two lines. They skim down, rarely reading text. Consequently, Americans are unreachable. That was to be my point.

36 thoughts on “Obama: The poor gotta stay poor

  1. I’m not able to write much these days, so I’ll pass on a (IMO) gem I read lately by John Steppling.


    “There is a collective regression to contemporary thinking. Or maybe it is the loss of thinking itself. But overlaying this can be seen a collection of resentments and fears, of desires and identifications with power and aggression. And some of this is being played out in the climate discourse. I continue to refer to Cory Morningstar’s work (Wrong Kind of Green http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/ ) where capitalism and class hierarchies are subsumed in a broader generalized (and confused) identification with, on the surface, action against global warming but also, on another perhaps deeper level, with Capital itself. With the ruling class and with authority.”


  2. With the greatest of respect, I do not believe the first graph is any more real than the second. How do the authorities know what global temperatures were 200 years ago let alone 2,000 years ago? Why on earth would I trust or believe a single thing these clowns have to say on the matter?

    A few years ago I decided to spend some time looking into how carbon dating is done. This soon led to learning about dendrochronology, or ‘tree ring dating’. I’ll never forget the day I learned about ‘tree ring dating’. Holy crap.

    All this time, I assumed that the experts had a plausible story, something logical and supported by evidence. They MUST have a plausible story, right?


    Liked by 1 person

    1. Ice cores are supported by other historical data, which is why I think them more reliable even as the science behind it, differing oxygen isotopes, is of course beyond me. We know that the Vikings farmed Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period, for instance, and that the Thames froze over each year during LIA. Each warm period, including the modern, has objective independent evidence in its favor, in addition to that of the LIA. Mann and Company set out to eliminate for MWP and LIA using tree rings, which as you say, was crap. It basically boiled down to one California bristlecone. But he wasn’t doing science. He as doing propaganda.


      1. “Ice cores are supported by other historical data”

        Such as?

        “differing oxygen isotopes”

        Sounds like quackery to me.

        “We know that the Vikings farmed Greenland”

        Do we know this? I don’t know this.

        I personally suspect that the so-called ‘vikings’ are a hoax.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Too easy on your end, no rigor. The very name “Greenland” needs to be mined to its origin, and the structures and trees there too. The use of oxygen isotopes to determine temperatures is settled science, and Mann had to upend it with his bristlecone nonsense. I suggest you go on a reading binge, as I have, not looking for quackery or honesty, but letting chips fall. Eras of human advancement coincide with abundance of food, and dark ages with famine and desperation and uncertainty about the next meal. People assured of nutrition are able to advance. Crop failures and hunger lead to migration and famines, plagues and wars. This is my take.


          1. “The use of oxygen isotopes to determine temperatures is settled science”

            With the greatest of respect, what does that even mean?

            That lots of people indoctrinated into the same quackery all parrot the same story?

            So what?

            Liked by 1 person

          2. The methodology was developed during a time before climate science was politicized, when they were genuinely interested in gathering reliable information. I could be wrong to trust it, but it is independently corroborated by data from other areas.

            But then, maybe everything is fake. No Vikings now. What next? Will I look down and find I have no feet?


          3. Please stop with the “with greatest respect” … you don’t have to genuflect. I have been known to ban people who are both disrespectful and stupid, but it is the stupid part that gets it done. You can flay me like fat off a pork loin if you want. You have a functioning brain. I know this about you.


        2. Leona woods was the only chick at fermi’s pile of shite in ci cago. She worked there with her first husband John Marshall. John was from the Marbury v Madison Marshall’s of course. James Marshall was Robert Morris’ son-in-law bytheway…

          “In the renowned Fermi research group, Leona assisted with the construction of Chicago Pile-1. Using her super vacuum skills, Dr. Woods created a boron trifluoride counter which was used to detect neutron activity, a crucial step in determining if a nuclear chain reaction had occurred. When Chicago Pile-1 reached criticality for the first time, Dr. Woods was the only female present. Her detector confirmed a sustained chain reaction, which was a fundamental concept necessary for the proof-of-concept of the atomic bomb.”

          …dr woods would later marry wild bill libby, the carbon 14 guy, and become a tree ring isotope guru of course…

          “After the death of Enrico Fermi in 1954, Dr. Woods and her husband John Marshall split ways.  She was traveling the country as a professor or fellow at a few small facilities such as Princeton, Brookhaven National Lab, NYU, and University of Colorado. In 1966, she reconnected with another Fermi research group member and Nobel laureate (notice a pattern?), Willard Libby. After their marriage, she moved to California where Libby lived and became a professor at UCLA. It was during her tenure at UCLA that Dr. Woods became interested in, and created the methodology for, the use of radioactive dating in tree rings to study changes in the temperature and rainfall patterns from hundreds of years before written records existed. This work was one of the first to seriously study climate change.

          Dr. Leona Woods passed away in 1986 at the young age of 67. In her lifetime, she went from child science prodigy to young phenom working on the top secret Manhattan project, and eventually became an advocate for the peaceful use of nuclear energy as a way to study climate change.”

          …Now that we know that nukes only exist on film I find it a bit suspicious that the radiocarbon dating folks take into account a bomb effect…

          “It turns out that virtually every tree that was alive starting in 1954 has a “spike” — an atomic bomb souvenir. Everywhere botanists have looked, “you can find studies in Thailand, studies in Mexico, studies in Brazil where when you measure for carbon-14, you see it there,” Nadkarni says. All trees carry this “marker” — northern trees, tropical trees, rainforest trees — it is a world-wide phenomenon.”
          If you come upon a tree in the Amazon that has no tree rings (and many tropical trees do not have rings), if you find a carbon-14 spike in the wood, then, Nadkarni says, “I know that all the wood that grew after that had to be after 1954.” So botanists can use the atomic testing decade as a calendar marker.
          You Can Carbon-14 A Person, Too!
          And, naturally, what goes for trees goes for others as well. In 2005, a Swedish stem cell biologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Jonas Frisen, decided to see if he could date people using the same technique. Frisen had studied pine trees and knew about the carbon-14 atomic bomb spike.
          He also reasoned that people eat the products of trees — apples, pears, peaches, olives, almonds, walnuts — and we also eat the animals that eat the fruits of trees, so he decided to see whether atomic testing had affected human cells.
          At a cellular level, he surmised, we are affected by what we eat, so he performed autopsies on two sets of humans. One group was born in the mid-1950s during the era of atomic testing. The second group was born later, in the ’60s, after the test ban treaty. When Frisen examined some brain cells in both groups, he discovered that humans born in the ’50s have more carbon-14 in their DNA, so the spike we see in trees is echoed in humans.
          This allowed him to age or “date” a person by examining the brain cells — a high carbon-14 count means the person was conceived in the era of atomic testing. That’s not a test you’d want to try at home, because rather than extract a brain cell, you can always ask your parents when you were born — but it did lead Frisen down some interesting paths.”

          …then again, my little buddy uses isotopes. And he’s obviously too clever to be duped. So who knows?


          1. i am not an everything is fake guy. Those who say there are no nukes must answer the question without massive supposition … what of all these nuclear power plants? Are they Easter Island statues?


          2. I don’t know what to make of nuclear reactors. My best guess is they are stage props that employ folks to put on an elaborate show. Like the places where they launch spaceships or smash particles I reckon.

            I don’t think everything is fake. No one does. However, I do have a tough time believing the asabovesobelow flying particle cosmology. And the same characters always seem to be turning up. You don’t find it strange that dr. Woods worked at fermi’s ci cago pile and then married bill libby, the radiocarbon dating guy; and then decides to get into the dendrochronology game? The radiocarbon dating game accounts for the bomb effect. So let’s put nuclear reactors aside, do you believe in nuclear bombs? If you don’t then radiocarbon dating should be an obvious hustle.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. I don’t know what to think about nuclear bombs. There are several possibilities – that they cannot exist, that they could exist but we are too smart to allow them to be made, or that the technology is capable of producing electricity generation by steam, but no more than that. That nuclear power plants are gigantic mausoleums to failed technology … I cannot buy that.

            My reading over the past couple of years led me to several authors who claimed that radiocarbon dating was unreliable. That kind of information doesn’t reside long in my brain before I have to revisit it. I grasp it for a period of time, but the decay rate is very high.


          4. Each of your several possibilities seem to preclude nuclear bomb tests. And seeing as the radiocarbon and dendrochronology dating games account for a shitton of extra radioactive carbon dioxide resulting from said precluded bomb tests; carbon 14 dating must be a scam as far as you’re concerned, no?

            Liked by 1 person

  3. It seems like much of current science is built on the nuclear lie. If the nukes aren’t real than everything sustanciated on this carbon-14 nonsense is just more fakery. Science isn’t my strong suit. But young prodigys who over achieve and change our world with multiple inventions, revelations, and who happen to meet all the right people and solve all the right problems are red flags to me.


  4. Mark, the first graph is not a temperature plot. It shows the amount of the Oxygen isotope 18 versus Oxygen isotope 16 (delta O18). It is a proxy, and with all proxies, it is hard to really pinpoint past temperatures; there is a huge range.

    18/16O and dendrochronology are proxy methods to estimate past climates, no honest scientist will say they are definitive proof or so, those are the talking heads of Discovery and NatGeo using those exact terms.

    C14 by the way has a very short half life, geologically speaking. There are way more methods to date rocks than C14/12, which is used mostly in archeology.


    1. The data thus garnered jives well with data from other fields, and has been widely accepted as valid until Mann and Company came along with their bristlecone. All we have for the past are proxies. That is understood.


        1. Everything we measure has ranges, so yes, there is always an uncertainty. So also with isotope ratios.

          “Highly unreliable” is not a scientific approach. What are your reliability thresholds? What other data do you check it against?

          And more importantly; what are your alternatives if you deem C14 analysis “highly unreliable”?


          1. I don’t know. I have not had time to revisit it. it’s not something I brought up. But I have to ask, if something is unreliable, why does there need to be alternatives? What if we are just left not knowing?


          2. Little buddy, do you believe in nuclear bombs? If not, how do convince yourself to believe in radiocarbon dating? Do you just ignore the so called bomb effect?


          3. My position is that knowing things for sure is almost impossible. That is not the point. What I read and hear is this anti-science stance. Not anti-scientism, which is healthy because scientism is anti-science, but anti-science.

            In every scientific discipline there are uncertainties and margins of error. That is a fact of life, not “the fault” of “science” or “flawed technology” as I see so many people saying.

            C14 dating is not useful for long periods of time and nobody but some conspies with 0 knowledge on YouTube claims so.


          4. Who was talking about half lives, little buddy?

            Anywhoo, you didn’t answer the question. I’ll rephrase it. Do you have sufficient evidence to believe in nuclear bombs? If not, how do you reconcile the lack of sufficient evidence for nuclear weapons with your apparent belief in radiocarbon dating, seeing as wild bill libby’s hustle accounted fer radioactive carbon dioxide caused by nuclear bomb tests?

            We can get into Aston’s meta-neon(a term stolen from besant and leadbeatter’s occult chemistry book of course) and his asabovesobelow ghostly shadow artwork if need be…

            Click to access pw_article_sept03.pdf


  5. I don’t know who these comments are being flung about at … I suggested that nuclear weapons might not exist, or that the technology was not allowed to be used for destruction. This left the question of nuclear power plants. Once the idea that nuclear technology does not exist is accepted, they hang like an albatross around your neck, so the answer I get is that they are merely fake. So what is going on inside them? Do they hold ritual burnings of iconic statues? Is this where Saturn resides? Is this where the Illuminati live? Reptilians? You have stretched reason to its limit and substituted wild speculation. The answer to “I don’t know” is not to fill a void with that wild speculation. It is “I need more and better information.” You do not have it, not to my satisfaction anyway. Nor do I.

    Then comes radiocarbon dating (and helium, for that matter). I have repeatedly said I don’t know, that my past reading indicate that it is a flawed technology, unreliable for long periods of time. That is all I know. The nonscientist faces severe limits, one of which is lack of depth … I can know some things, read to my heart’s content, but I will never have enough information to have an informed opinion on things that are beyond my ability to test on my own. I have to rely on the judgment of others, and for that reason my only good answer can only be that I don’t know, and when opinions of people with a depth of knowledge on a subject differ, I think it wise just to stay humble and observe.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. With Nukes, the question arises; “Why make them, if you can fake them?”

      Have you seen the ridiculous footage of those “tests”? It is Hollywood. You even see the miniature house being blown over, it is priceless footage.

      The concept of both nuclear weapons and nuclear energy is that there is a chain reaction possible, just “contained” in the latter case. But why would there be a chain reaction needed? The most common explanation for “nuclear reactors” is that they are dumpsites of excess energy elsewhere and then passed off as “generated energy”.

      If you want to know more about the Nuke Hoax, read 221bBakerStreet’s posts:

      Nuke Hoax points.


        1. It is speculation, but not so wild. Bakerstreet is an engineer who worked at a “nuclear plant” in Canada and that made him see this possibility. Insider knowledge so you will. He’s smart and independent.

          As with anything, the hypothesis answers some questions and provokes others.

          They claim “Hiroshima” got “100,000,000 degrees Celsius”, “the temperature of the interior of the Sun”. It doesn’t prove nuclear energy is not real, but still.

          Why would the chain reactions be real? Radiation demonstrably is. And isotopes are measured. Whatever they are, the atomic model is just that; a model.

          If nuclear energy would be real, why is it restricted to certain countries? Similar to the Apollo program. 50 years later and counting.

          If nuclear bombs are fake anyway, what’s the problem with nuclear energy and “Iran having it”? It makes no sense if one is fake and the other isn’t.


      1. Are you familiar with the Klaus Fuchs affair? Have you researched it? (I have not.) I am also curious about the Eichmann affair, as each of these famous trials set in cement some of the most important mythology of our era, the bomb and the Holocaust.


  6. Not sure if it fits in with this topic exactly, but on a music site I visit they posted this interesting video by R. Beck about immigration and gumballs –


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s