Contributed Post with additional commentary

After the widespread acceptance of the Al Gore hit film “An Inconvenient Truth”, It is surprising that most of the usually scandal-happy news outlets have overlooked one of the biggest stories in the past decade: Climate-Change data that is the very foundation of the Global Warming craze was manipulated to promote the theory. To put it another way, the scientists who advocate the Global Warming theory didn’t use science to arrive at their conclusion. It’s interesting news, and great timing – it just snowed in a New Mexico desert.

Global Warming has become a multi-billion dollar industry, and its evangelists, like Gore, are quickly becoming the Rockefellers and JP Morgans of the 21st century with this new industry. If the news of the unsound “scientific” foundation of Global Warming gets out, however, this new industry may go the way of asbestos insulation, radium watches and lead paint.

The following is intended for those who are not aware of the emerging scandal that was quickly dubbed “Climate-gate”, and should work as a quick overview of the scandal as of today, complete with links and searchable keywords.

It’s late & I just got back from a long trip, but I need to get something off my chest.

Earlier tonight, a friend posted a facebook poll called “Acceptance of a Child”. It asks the question,

“If your child came to you and told you they were gay, would you accept and support them?”

After last night’s inappropriate, godless and predictable performances on the American Music Awards, I figured its time I shift gears for a bit and complain about pseudo-religion. Our nation, our society – even much of the world – is increasing its pace to destruction foretold by prophets on all continents.

As I was browsing the day’s headlines, I found an interesting example of the kind of corruption that unfortunately has some modern Christians – though well-intentioned- promoting works of the devil. It is a sad reminder of the things some turn to while stumbling around in darkness. 

It’s a little annoying that nearly every media outlet is commenting on Obama bowing to the Japanese emperor, but it makes sense. I don’t think it’s about the bow itself as much as its about the body language and his history of using the same kind of body language in other situations.

When you watch him standing in line for photo ops with other world leaders, he looks like a scared puppy. I think the dog similarity is good to make this point: If world leaders were a pack of wild dogs, by cowering before them, apologizing for America, and otherwise being a weak and timid voice representing our country, he would NOT be the “alpha dog”. By dog-training standards, him doing that begs for another dog to step up and take charge.

At this time in our history do we want to have another world leader take charge? A lot of countries have been meeting to back away from the US dollar as a monetary standard, a lot of countries blame us for the economic crisis, and despite backing out of the war in Iraq, we are still the “leader” in that fight.

More than any other time in recent history, it is dangerous for a US president to be weak. At least “locally” I think Chavez is the leader that will step up, and that is a frightening thing.

Michelle Malkin had a good bit on Obama’s bowing complete with a pictorial showing other leaders who did not bow:

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/14/president-o-bow-ma/

see also:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-emperor-akihito-japan.html

 

I got a letter in the mail the other day from an energy company that wants to build a nuclear power plant a couple miles from my house.

The letter was pretty much some pre-emptive propaganda to prepare the community to accept a big corporation’s* nuclear facility that had supposedly (according to what they told us last year) pulled out because they couldn’t find a suitable area. It included un-pro phrases like “that’s just media hype” to describe opposing viewpoints. They made several claims and promises, so I want to add my comments to those claims:

     I’ve been using a checklist of criteria for all new purchases to ensure anything we spend money on will give us the “best bang for the buck”. It’s not terribly interesting, but it does what it is supposed to do, and in the least it keeps supplies from ending up in the trash.

The basic points of the list are as follows:

• DURABILITY
• UTILITY over fashion
• MULTIPLE-USE
• PORTABILITY
• SALVAGEABILITY (it can be repaired if it breaks)
• TRADEABILITY
• ENERGY consumption/method
• REDUNDANCY

I submitted a write-up on it to survivalblog.com, and you can view the full text (including examples and a lot of hot air)  here: http://www.survivalblog.com/2009/10/the_dumpster_list_by_inforodeo.html

By following the DUMPSTER list, you’ll save money in the long-term and greatly enhance your self-sufficiency abilities.

About 20 minutes ago – 9:00am Mountain time – I saw a quick report on HLN as I was flipping through the channels. A Christian janitor at a girl’s school in (Pakistan?) gave his life to protect the Muslim girls inside from a suicide bomber. The bomber had approached the front door of the school and the janitor blocked him and tried to force him outside … the bomber then detonated his device, killing the Christian Janitor and two Muslim students – but several others were spared.

I just read an article about an Atheist/Agnostic group who have purchased billboards, bus ads, and even a (Christmas) display at a State capitol. They’re even having organized meetings to celebrate their hatred for others who don’t share their belief in nothing. The specific article was actually talking about how there is a division among the non-believers about how harshly to push their views on others. Some worry that it weakens their own argument against religion being bullish.

Imagine a corporation existed whose sole function was to output chemicals into the environment, and they received their money from smaller companies who saw some profit to be made in any consequences of the chemical impact on the environment, as well as received tax breaks and other incentives from the government because the government also periodically needed the company’s services to release other chemicals into the environment. There is controversy about the chemicals that they are releasing into nature – a handful of people, including the company, claim the chemicals are harmless, that they are already present in the environment and therefore ‘natural’, or that the chemicals are actually beneficial to the environment.

About six years ago, I was suffering daily from heartburn, and a friend suggested (partly on the advice of her sister, who worked for a pharmaceutical manufacturer) that I try Prilosec. Within a day my heartburn was completely gone, and I figured I didn’t need it anymore, but she said I should follow the full 14-day course, so I did.

When I finished, I followed the instructions to not take it again for four months, and by the following morning I was in more pain than I’d been in previously. My friend called her sister, and relayed the message that it was ok to continue to take it, because they “only suggest the four month break in case there is something more serious going on”.