Lonnie E. Schubert:

“Munich Re: The investigation of Roger Pielke, Jr. brings up the incorrect scientific pretentions of this Administration. There is no evidence of increasing losses occurring from more intense weather events, as correctly reported by Pielke. The largest and second-largest reinsurance companies in the world, Munich Re and Swiss Re, reported that 2014 was benign for losses from natural disasters and overall losses are declining. The largest single owner of Munich Re stock is Berkshire Hathaway, which is controlled by Warren Buffett. Buffett is thought to be a supporter of this Administration.

Is the next move for John Holdren to call Warren Buffet, demanding that he inflate the losses of Munich Re to conform with Holdren’s climate beliefs? See TWTW Feb 7, 2015 & Dec 20, 2014″

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

The Week That Was: 2015-02-28 (February 28, 2015) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project


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

Politicized Science: This week members of Congress removed any doubt that Climate Science has become highly politicized, virtually ignoring that scientific knowledge is based on empirical evidence, not based on what some scientists claim they think they know. The once respected New York Times (NYT), had an article criticizing Wei-Hock Soon (Willie Soon) for failing to disclose in publications that the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics received some $1.2 million from fossil fuel sources to support the work of Soon, including the utility company, Southern Company. The Center also received some of this money from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, which is now a favorite target of environmental groups. The article stated that the documents were…

View original 6,309 more words

Jenni wrote, http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2015/03/common-sense-questions-about-eois-and.html, and quotes a legislator: “Jenni, we make laws up here (the Capitol), that’s what we do.”

Yep, they seem to think it is their job to make stuff up.

I keep reminding all the legislators I can get to listen, it ain’t their job to pass laws.

Some might ask, “Well, what else would they do?” To which I would like to say nothing, but that isn’t quite true.

They need to represent us in running the business of the government. Making more rules for lording over us is not the business of the government. They need to represent and ensure as little of our money is taken from us as possible. They need to represent us and ensure as little of our money is wasted as possible. They need to represent us and ensure the government isn’t trying to do anything they shouldn’t be doing.

They need to acknowledge that government is violence. They need to acknowledge that unless what is being discussed needs the official sanction of societal threat of violence, then they ought not be doing it.

Blake Neff, writing for the Daily Caller, http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/28/why-are-conservatives-so-bloody-mad-about-apush/, explains a bit.

I posted this bit on my Facebook (more after the “more”):

Repeating, “The central goal of any AP class is to prepare students to pass the end-of-year exam.” Thus, nothing is taught but what will be on the test. [Keep in mind that student performance on these tests factors into the teacher’s performance evaluation, usually to an unhealthy, even scary, proportion.]

My complaint is this money-driven, left-leaning agenda-driven organization is making money hand over fist off our kids. For what? So they have a more in-depth, advanced history class? Well, that would be okay, if it was inexpensive, and if it actually was. It seems to me we can do better ourselves. Let the teachers do their jobs. College Board hypes these courses as money-saving. Pretending parents (or the student) will save money by not having to take the course at university. Hogwash! It just don’t work that way, and our school districts are paying through the nose to save a little money for very few of their students. Stop it. Honors classes are good, great even, but AP is just a money-maker, overhyped.  Read the rest of this entry »

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Our postmodern world.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Guest essay by William M. Briggs, statistician. Reposted from his blog wmbriggs.com


A very odd thing happened in Science. Turns out a famous weatherman has been forecasting highs in the 60s then 70s for New York City all winter long. But the temperature never rose above the single digits, teens, twenties, and thirties.

One day a writer at the New York Post wrote an article telling people not to trust the weatherman, who, it turned out, had issued a prediction for the following day for a “High of 80!”

Climatologists stationed at NASA on the Upper West Side were incensed that a non-scientist would interfere with Science. So the climatologists spoke with the weatherman, who said he was basing his predictions on a sophisticated computer model. The weatherman admitted his difficulties, but said his model would have performed great if only he had better measures of surface snow cover.

View original 637 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

For the record.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Romm YouTube Image Joe Romm, of the political activist group: Center for American Progress

After the Willie Soon imbroglio there came news that Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., who is not a climate skeptic, is also under investigation (in what can only be seen as part of a broader witch-hunt). Pielke Jr. writes on his blog, “the Climate Fix” about undisclosed Conflicts Of Interest (COI):

I have Tweeted that undisclosed COI is endemic in scientific publishing. I have had several requests for elaboration.

Here is a great example.

This paper was published by ERL in 2010: http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/1/014017/fulltext/

It has a list of 53 co-authors. The ERL publication policy states:

“All authors and co-authors are required to disclose any potential conflict of interest when submitting their article (e.g. employment, consulting fees, research contracts, stock ownership, patent licenses, honoraria, advisory affiliations, etc). This information should be included in an acknowledgments section at the end…

View original 399 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Senator Jim Inhofe, Oklahoma.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Senate EPW Republicans Take a Stand for Academic Freedom

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OKla.), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), today led all EPW Republicans in a letter promoting scientific discovery and academic freedom. The letter was sent to the same 107 recipients of letters sent earlier this week by Congressional Democrats to universities, private companies, trade groups, and non-profit organizations, asking for detailed information on funding climate science. As explained in the EPW Republican letter sent today, there is a real concern the Democrats inquiry may impose a chilling effect on scientific inquiry and free speech.

“Rather than empower scientists and researchers to expand the public discourse on climate science and other environmental topics, the [Democrats] letter could be viewed as an attempt to silence legitimate intellectual and scientific inquiry,” said the Senators in today’s letter.

There has been a public…

View original 549 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Yes, agreed. Not much to add here.
We must always take a big-picture view. We must always account for all of God’s work, all of history. Failure to do so is simply failure.
God has a full plan that is working out.
History is unimaginably long. It is unwise to assert it is over, nearly complete. We may have little time here on earth. We know we have but a moment individually. Our life is looking forward. All humanity collectively may have little time, maybe less than one generation, but how can we suppose? Life, all of history, tells us to take the long view. We’ve had billions of years in God’s natural creation. Who’s to say we have less than billions more?
We must live for the Kingdom. That is our calling. We must represent Jesus. We must bear His image. We just show forth his mercy and service. We must live for The King as kings and priests for all God’s good creation.

“Wright’s emphasis on the vocation of Jesus as Israel’s Messiah, who fulfills Israel’s obedience and as the true image of God who fulfills Adam’s calling makes sense of the story where many truncated messages falter. This can, will, and should, preach. Primarily because it is faithful to scripture and to the mission of God in the world.”

Even so, come Lord Jesus.


Originally posted on Musings on Science and Theology:

michelangelo's Adam 2The second essay in N. T. Wright’s book Surprised by Scripture addresses the question Do We Need a Historical Adam? Wright accepts a historical Adam and Eve as a representative pair chosen by God, much as God later chose Abraham and Israel. The need for a historical Adam is much the same as the need for a historical Israel. This is the way the story is told, and the way God worked in the world. (My interpretation, Wright never put it quite like this.) The significance of Adam isn’t as progenitor of the human race or as originator of sin. Rather, the significance of Adam is in his vocation to be God’s image bearer in the world and in his failure to live up to this vocation.

In any discussion of Adam the key passages to consider are the passages written by Paul in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15…

View original 1,558 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Grijalva actions are disgusting.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Gijalva Raul M. Grijalva

The letter below from Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva of Arizona speaks to the worst sort of witch hunt tactics that we’ve seen yet. I suspect that pulling on these threads will backfire on Grijalva, as this will motivate a lot of people to join the fight against this sort of “climate McCarthyism” The letter is reproduced in full below, with the original PDF also available. It’s like he’s got Mann’s #kochmachine delusions ideas.

Feb. 24, 2015
L. Rafael Reif
President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139

Dear President Reif:

As Ranking Member of the House Committee on Natural Resources, I have a constitutional duty to protect the public lands, waters and resources of the United States and ensure that taxpayers are able to enjoy them. I write today because of concerns raised in a recent New York Timesreport and documents I have…

View original 656 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Insightful and funny.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

The recent climate skeptic witch hunt, even against people like Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., who ISN’T a climate skeptic but has presented some data on severe weather losses that contradict the current meme of “severe weather caused by global warming”, prompted Josh to pen a new cartoon.

He gets right to the source of the whole fossil fuel problem.


Cartoons by Josh

View original

Lonnie E. Schubert:

If they had facts, they’d pound the facts, but since they have none, they pound their opponents.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

While a smear campaign rages in the media and at the Congressional level, Russell Cook takes a look at its roots

merchants_of_smear“Regurgitate Unsupportable Accusations, We Much?” Kert Davies is Back. Again.

A brief word of explanation about the first part of that title, it’s a variation of the “Resist, we much” teleprompter reading gaffe by the Reverend Al Sharpton, where he meant to say “Resist, we must” on his TV show. It lends itself to a variety of other overblown political situations which beg for a “Sharptonism” parody. The latest instances where Boston Globe, New York Times, and Washington Post articles cited Kert Davies’ supposedly damaging documents (screencaptures here, here and here), in an effort to trash skeptic climate scientist Dr Willie Soon, invites exactly that kind of parody.

View original 1,090 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

It is not possible to overemphasize the religious nature, the fundamentalist religiosity, of the global warming cult. Many of those involved are just blinded scientists. (“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” Upton Sinclair.) However, many are religious zealots in the most horrific sense of the term. Fundamentalists, radicals, many of whom have called for imprisonment, even execution, of the opposition.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

IPCC has lost its scientific objectivity

London, 25 February: The GWPF has, for a long time, warned policymakers and the public that the leadership of the IPCC has been losing its scientific objectivity and has been adopting environmentalism as a missionary cause. The astonishing letter of resignation released yesterday by its outgoing chairman, RK Pachauri, drops all pretence to the contrary and proves that our concerns were valid. In it he states:

“For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.”

The author of that statement has, for the past 13 years, been one of the world’s most influential government advisers in the area of energy and climate policy, and one of the most visible spokespersons for climate science.

During this time we have witnessed a near-complete shutting down of…

View original 126 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Eat your own much?

Roger Pielke, Jr. is an accomplished scientist and researcher. He most definitely accepts as reasonable the hypothesis that humans and our burning are responsible for increases in atmospheric warmth trapping, that is, so called, global warming. He is provably “on their side.” Yet, the religious fundamentalists of the global climate change catastrophism cult (generally indistinguishable from the former movement lead by the late Harold Camping) noticed that Mr. Pielke does not always adhere to Gaia-doctrine and the party line. He does not always advance the official narrative. Thus, he must be crucified for the good of the cause.


Nope. Environmentalism and the global warming cult is simply superstitious religion bundled in secular causes and save-the-world rhetoric.

Mr. Pielke has clearly and only shown data. Just the facts. Nothing more. Yet, he is pilloried. All for the cause.

To reiterate, I quote Mr. Pielke, “Before continuing, let me make one point abundantly clear: I have no funding, declared or undeclared, with any fossil fuel company or interest. I never have. Representative Grijalva knows this too, because when I have testified before the US Congress, I have disclosed my funding and possible conflicts of interest. So I know with complete certainty that this investigation is a politically-motivated “witch hunt” designed to intimidate me (and others) and to smear my name.”
“When “witch hunts” are deemed legitimate in the context of popular causes, we will have fully turned science into just another arena for the exercise of power politics. The result is a big loss for both science and politics.”

Originally posted on The Climate Fix:

As some of you will already know, I am one of 7 US academics being investigated by US Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) who is the ranking member of the House of Representatives Committee on Environment and Natural Resources. Rep. Grijalva has sent a letter to the president of my university requesting a range of information, including my correspondence, the letter is here in PDF.

Before continuing, let me make one point abundantly clear: I have no funding, declared or undeclared, with any fossil fuel company or interest. I never have. Representative Grijalva knows this too, because when I have testified before the US Congress, I have disclosed my funding and possible conflicts of interest. So I know with complete certainty that this investigation is a politically-motivated “witch hunt” designed to intimidate me (and others) and to smear my name.

For instance, the Congressman and his staff, along with compliant journalists…

View original 683 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Speak up. Stand up, or when they come for you, there will be no one left.

Essential for the record.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

Roger Pielke, Jr. is not a skeptic of human-induced global warming, as we all know.  Pielke Jr. is being investigated, however, for the “crime” of presenting data that disagree with alarmists who make bogus claims about weather and weather-related losses.

See Roger’s post I am under “Investigation”, in which he discusses the investigation by US Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), the ranking member of the House of Representatives Committee on Environment and Natural Resources.  Pielke, Jr.’s “crime”:

Prof. Roger Pielke, Jr., at CU’s Center for Science and Technology Policy Research has testified numerous times before the U.S. Congress on climate change and its economic impacts. His 2013 Senate testimony featured the claim, often repeated, that it is “incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouse gases.”

Roger notes in his post:

The letter goes on to note that John Holdren, President…

View original 483 more words

Does anybody wonder, might attention deficit disorder arise primarily because no one has paid attention to the child, such that he learns and internalizes that not only he is important, but attention is important?


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 382 other followers

%d bloggers like this: