Absolutely scientific proof that “global warming” is fraud!

It’s been a long time since I’ve had an intelligent debate with anyone, on Facebook, blogging, and real life.  I feel compelled to scientifically and mathematically rebuke anything that is not scientific or mathematical. It is correct that gravitational pull varies with the square of the distance- so does the concentration of infrared photons vibrating/spinning/traveling away from a heat source. Now the Sun, as large as it is, puts out a FINITE amount of infrared light, thus an object in a 0K vacuum will warm up to a maximum temperature. It is impossible to “warm” this object any further without an additional heat source, that is basic thermodynamics. So let us include geothermal heat.

If you broil a steak at 500F, that steak will not get hotter than 500F unless you have another hotter heat source that will raise the average ambient temperature above 500F.

Now if we extinguish the Sun, or move it far enough away, all that CO2 will reverse sublimate down to 0K and we won’t have to worry about any “toxic” carbon dioxide in our atmosphere because our planet will be covered by a layer of dry ice, frozen oxygen an frozen nitrogen. There won’t be any atmosphere because everything would be solid, it’s 0K remember. Oh, and there would not be any geothermal heat either after a while.

Thus the Sun is proven to be responsible for 100% of the Earth’s temperature, the carbon dioxide will just assume whatever temperature in its environment. The “greenhouse effect” means that infrared light that can’t escape was already there, all that means is that CO2 slows the Earth’s cooling, that is not warming, the temperature cannot go above a maximum. You need to introduce an ADDITIONAL HOTTER HEAT SOURCE to do that.

There are few stronger scientific arguments than thermodynamic ones.

Al Gore was right, the science is settled. His side lost. Why do you think he is afraid to debate Christopher Lord Monckton? The CCX (Chicago Climate Exchange) is dead, go see how much carbon futures are worth- less than a pencil. Enron tried the same scam with electricity in California, great way to rip the middle class off, and that’s all the globalists want- a few thousand elites and everybody else as slaves who cannot afford to resist or protest.

CO2 is everywhere, and that is why foreign banks want to tax it. Ever stop and think that rainwater might REMOVE some CO2 and contaminants from our atmosphere? And if plants were not getting enough CO2, vegetation would die. CO2 turns blood blue, so it is soluble. God created CO2 for a reason.

Oh, and lightning passing through O2 makes O3, it’s so much fun to teach environmentalists real science!!

On the necessity of being vigilant in the weeks and months ahead

If there is one thing the intelligence-media-education-infotainment complex is trying to convince us through the “talking trays”, is that all aspects of our society are vulnerable to any arbitrary disruption/crisis, etc. Just look at how many “crises” we have had since 9/11. First, every few years, then every year, then an oil rig blows up April 20, then May 6 the DJIA drops almost 1,000 points. Don’t think Goldman Sachs can’t drop it 2,000 points if they straddle enough puts and calls (a virtual “naked short”) or hold all buy orders, creating a selling panic. Then the Federal Reserve’s “Plunge Protection Team” will print enough digital money to stabilize the markets. And that’s just money. The banks want everyone to know who the boss is, no Fed audit, no re-enacting Glass-Steagall or the uptick rule on short-selling.

The importance of who is responsible for these manufactured crises pales in comparison to how the government responds, what prepackaged solutions/legislative agenda is  first suggested, second they try to sell it to you. Third time’s the charm, it gets RAMMED THROUGH. Usually right before Congress recesses, then you have the distraction of election propaganda when they get back, then it’s “Christmas”(Yule/Saturnalia). You have to hand it to the media, they know how to distract the public. It is also important how  and what type of propaganda is reported. Is it a new disease hoax/billion-dollar vaccine sales pitch? The media is trying to elicit the emotion of fear so that you will beg the government to protect you rather than just PROTECT YOURSELF.

Maybe some mineral-rich Third World country has nukes and won’t let inspectors in so will it be World War III? Maybe there will be another “flash crash”? Where is Bin Laden? Oh another terrorist got through TSA so they have to spend hundreds of millions on new scanners? It goes on and on.

Now the BP gusher is still playing out and there is a renewed push for a “carbon tax”/cap-and-trade scheme, which is supposed to raise gasoline and utility prices. A peaceful way of protesting this would be to UNPLUG EVERYTHING in your house. It would be nice if everyone unplugged their TV’s for one week if this happens so that every single cable channel got ZERO Nielsen ratings, a good message to send. People have to be prepared to unite and take action by protesting this way. How better to send the message to the media that we are sick of the lies and disinformation, we are sick of hearing about celebrities, we won’t pay carbon taxes if we don’t use electricity. They might not listen to you, but they will listen to a utility company if residential demand falls off a cliff.

The bottom line is that we need to be prepared to live without technology and the creature comforts if need be. If the government tries to take over the Internet, we need to be courageous and unplug our computers until they get the message. Big Brother can’t watch you if the computer is unplugged. We need to strive to be self-sufficient and help each other out. As you can plainly see, you can’t depend on the federal alphabet agencies.

So what is going to happen next or will it be a new distraction every day? As long as we don’t pay attention to what is happening to our money, it doesn’t matter. Foreign banks can steal as much money as they want. Government can steal as much money as it wants, but we’ll feel better if they explain how they really didn’t want to steal it but had to. Crises, you know, there is honor among thieves. We should be willing to pay anything (including our souls) to have our loving government protect us from outside evil. Isn’t government trying to subvert the position of God? Well are you going to PRAY or beg your goverment?

Same thing, you want something and a higher authority decides if you can have it. Who that higher authority is up to you, but my money is on God, because God loves you, the government doesn’t.

As I said, people need to start uniting against all this, not take the consumer fetal position.

Absolutely incontrovertible proof that our government, BP, the corporate mainstream media, etc. are LYING about the size of the BP oil disaster!!

Let us assume that in one day that 86,400 barrels of oil erupt from the sea floor. What is so special about the number 86,400? Well if 86,400 barrels of oil enter the Gulf of Mexico in one day, then divide by 24 to get 3,600 barrels per hour,  divide by 60 to get 60 barrels per minute, or one barrel per second.

Now I want you to watch the underwater camera, does that look like it is only one barrel per second? Considering that the hydrostatic pressure of the water all by itself is over 2200 psi, and that on the Alex Jones show, Lindsey Williams estimated the wellhead pressure of the oil as 20,000-70,000 psi, it is very reasonable to assume that more than one barrel per second is escaping.

Let me put it another way: 10 barrels/sec = 864,000 barrels per day

100 barrels/sec= 8,640,000 barrels per day. How many barrels do you think are leaking per second? Multiply that by 86,400 to get how much oil is leaked in a day… then multiply THAT by the number of days (57 as of 6/16/2010).

Sounds like tens if not hundreds of millions or BILLIONS if you ask me…

Now what are the official propaganda numbers, 5000 barrels per day, then 10,000 barrels, then 20,000, then 60,000, then 125,000? If they keep multiplying, they’ll eventually get the right number. They keep changing the number because they are LYING (plus they don’t think anyone knows how to divide by 86,400 to get barrels per second).

Thus it has been mathematically proven that official estimates of the BP disaster are absurdly low. How many barrels could that rig extract in a day? Well probably a lot less than what is still leaking into the Gulf of Mexico to this day.

They can’t “cap” anything at that pressure, especially when oil is INCOMPRESSIBLE, basically hydraulic fluid, and the magma can melt anything and the sand/rock can abrade anything? It’s like a sandblaster, except a lot more pressure. Not only that, the magma, which is molten rock at thousands of degrees is hitting water at nearly freezing temperatures, sublimating/flash-boiling it to create high-pressure steam

If they try to nuke it, they risk damage to the sea floor/tsunami. BP would have an easier time if God parted the waters in the Gulf of Mexico, then all BP would have to worry about is the volcano part.

What about the oil that goes UNDER the boom? What about all the oil underwater? How long will it take this oil to circumnavigate the earth’s oceanic currents?

And Obama/Soetoro’s cap-and-trade CARBON TAXES will solve the BP disaster (right?!?!?), who needs God and Moses? Taxes plug volcanoes!! How stupid do they think we are?

Breaking it to us gently: How CNBC desensitizes millions of people who have lost thousands of dollars

With respect to the sudden thousand-point drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average on May 6, 2010, I would like to explain how networks like CNBC employ psychological warfare against their audience. The basic idea is that if the market is up and you are actually making money, watching CNBC is very entertaining. They are making you feel as though you are an insider, the women are cute (this alone has a calming effect on men), they throw around some legitimate investing terms or they play word games.

Now, on the other hand, when the market is down is when their propaganda strategy gets more interesting. When you are losing money, they substitute a metaphor for losing money, so that hopefully you’ll be thinking about something else than losing money. An example is the Wall Street slang term haircut. It is a euphemism for losing money, but hopefully you’ll be thinking about barbershops. See, it’s not so bad. You didn’t lose thousands of dollars because of market manipulation, you got a haircut, it will grow back.

The host of CNBC’s Mad Money, Jim Cramer will tell you that “the market favors the big boys” and how Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, hedge funds, pensions, etc. and even he himself can have undue influence in the stock market. Just watch the ticker tape on the screen when he mentions a company. It’s a hilarious show, he’ll dress up in a silly outfit, throw chairs around, hit the sound effect board. The point is he wants to make you feel good, even if you are losing a boatload of money. He’ll console you and tell you about how one afternoon he lost $17 million and destroyed nearly every electronic device in his office. See? Losing 10% of your retirement money isn’t so bad.

Are you beginning to see how this works?

They can use words that rhyme to throw you off- “flash crash” (for the 1000 point Dow drop), “car czar”, etc.

It’s called pacifying people, and it is a psychological warfare technique. They do everything for a reason. People end up becoming sheeple. We Americans today are so passive that if gasoline went up to $10, the greatest opposition from most people would be to say “It’s crazy”, sympathize, say “What can you do?” and pay it. Some people would love the endorphin rush of  buying $100 worth of gas with a $100 bill. How high would gas have to go before people woke up?

People behave like this because their minds are under constant assault from corporate propaganda and trivia news that is intended to DISTRACT you from the incremental erosion of your civil rights. It is all about emotionally manipulating you so that you do not challenge the sociopolitical/business/government establishment, thereby assuring insecure paranoid sociopathic megalomaniacs remain in a superior caste.

Very clever. Now everyone can go back to sleep. Foreigners are not trying to steal our nest eggs. Smile. Be Happy. You’re Rich. Go Shopping.

George Washington’s Farewell Address and Political Parties

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

-George Washington’s Farewell Address 1796

This is only an excerpt but clearly exposes the left-right party paradigm and how dangerous it is to a constitutional republic. We should have listened to our Founding Fathers.

The Mainstream Media, Name-Calling, and Control of Human Language

One of the most recent trends in mainstream media is to call someone a name whose negative connotation as a substitute for legitimate debate. In this blog I will give several examples of this immature name-calling and how one or two tags alleviates the responsibility of a journalist/news anchor to research his counterargument.

“9/11 truther”: Apparently the ones who accept the official government-approved version events are 9/11 liars? One seriously has to question the quality of reporting when negative connotations are attached to words like “truth”, “patriot”, etc.

“conspiracy theorist”: On p.305 of Black’s Law Dictionary, “conspiracy” is defined as: n. An agreement by two or more persons to commit an unlawful act; a combination for an unlawful purpose. In criminal law, conspiracy is a separate offense from the crime that is the object of the conspiracy. Now  “theory” on the other hand is supposed to imply that one’s opinion is questionable if not completely wrong. But the truth or falsity of a theory cannot be discerned  from calling it a theory alone. Theories can be based on speculation and weak scientific evidence (the “Theory” of Evolution), or they can be proven in laboratories (the “Theory” of Relativity).

Which brings me to my main rebuttal to this term. If no conspiracy is involved, either only ONE person committed a crime, or two or more people did something perfectly legal. That means 19 Muslims hijacking three planes is a conspiracy theory, does it not? More than one person, illegal. Let’s be fair now.

“Patriot”- This was a good thing once, Paul Revere, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, now anyone who believes in national sovereignty and return to Constitutional government is an enemy of the state. Ironically, “patriot” is good when it refers to the unconstitutional “law” that was rammed through by former Senator Tom Daschle and others right after 9/11 because of the anthrax hype- here it means “Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”. So a patriot can be “good” or “bad”, making it an excellent example of Orwellian doublethink.

“Birther”- If anything, the clause in the Constitution which prohibits foreign-born citizens from obtaining the presidency was intended to close the marriage loophole. Arnold Schwarzenegger was not allowed to run for president because he was born in Austria, however no such proof or test was given to Barack Obama, whose biological parents lived in Kenya. So I guess it’s bad to be a birther, but “deathers” are cool? This name-calling is so ridiculous that it is fun to find their antonyms.

“Climate Change Denier”- Now that global warming has been scientifically debunked, and Ernst Zundl was imprisoned (but now free) for “holocaust denial”, this gives the propagandists an opportunity to dovetail two negative connotations. First, they can pretend they never used the words “global warming”, because “climate change” is a lot more flexible and allows for cooling cycles. Some environmentalists/carbon tax advocates are actually demanding laws against “climate change deniers” to capitalize on the holocaust denier label. So is it okay to send someone to jail for Creation Denial if they believe in evolution? Can we go to jail for Grass Color Denial if we argue that grass is purple? Or does our Constitution say “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

LOL lawyers don’t understand the “no law” part.

“Teabagger”- The account of the Boston Tea Party we learned growing up was because the British quadrupled the tax on tea, which they had a near monopoly on. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back, the Stamp Act was bad enough. The colonists were being taxed so heavily that they boarded British ships under cover of darkness and dumped all the tea overboard. The curious may check out the sexually explicit connotations of “teabag(ger)” at urbandictionary.com, I won’t define it here. The question we need to ask ourselves today is how much taxation will WE tolerate before refusing to pay the tax?

Oh, but then they call us tax protesters. What are we supposed to do, let our corporate government devour as much of our paycheck as possible? Raising taxes or leaving people with less net income sounds like a great way to stimulate the economy. Now if you believe you are entitled to money you have worked for, you are a sexual pervert. See how the logic works?

If someone plays word games with you, give it right back to them. ;^)