Science and Jailing Dissenters

Here is a fun fact and something you should know. All of the global warming information you have been led to believe is based on data from the last 100 years as recorded by machines; however we have reliable data going back 800,000 years and you have never been told about it. Why not take a look at the complete picture.

Wikipedia - European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica.  EPICA is the scientists that we fund to take ice cores in Antarctica and from those cores they can see how warm it was in the past, even before people were capable of determining it. Guess what it shows? It shows that we have not been warming steadily; but, rather we are in an expected cycle of warming. In fact if you go to Wikipedia - Temperature Records you can see their chart.

If you want to look at temperatures for the past five and a half million years you will see that we are actually colder. Wikipedia - Geologic temperature record. This is not surprising as we have known that the earth has been cooling for millions of years for a pretty long time.

If you go back to the Temperature records link you can scroll down till you get to their chart and you will see that the earth has been warming for about 22,000 years since the last time temperatures bottomed out. In fact, while the earths temperature has increased in the last 22,000 years it appears to have topped out, as was expected, and is now going down again and there is nothing we can do to cause it or prevent it.

Now, solar activity also has an effect on climate; but, that is harder to measure back in history. We can say that the planet gets hotter for a short period of time following intense solar flare activity; but, one also has to consider how trees and atmospheric changes effect temperature. We have a much easier time showing how volcanic activity effects temperature as extreme volcanic activity has a much more immediate and extensive effect on temperatures as it can block out the sun's rays. On top of this we look at the effect of asteroids on the earth. It is believed by just about every scientist that the dinosaurs were extinguished because of a single asteroid hitting the earth and putting such an alarming amount of dust in the air that it caused an ice age that wiped out the dinosaurs.

Here is a simple question, if we are going to ignore the scientific evidence that we have spent billions in collecting regarding temperatures over earth's history, then why would we rely on the records only for the last 100 years? The temperatures for the last 100 years are well within the predicted ranges and that includes all the records that pre-date man even inventing fire.

So why do I bring all of this up today. To begin with, I have been writing about the presidential race more than I wanted to. It is an important issue and attempts to limit our democratic approach to our representatives disgusts me and if you read my last post you probably feel pretty disgusted to. I went out to dinner with two very conservative friends tonight and we discussed that post and the prior ones that were labeled "What's Going On" and it had upset them because they finally saw how they were being lied to by the politicians and the "political establishment" that funds them, you know, the wealthy who make up the donor class. The second reason is that this blog has never been about one thing, it has always been about looking at everything through a different lens.

Now I want to discuss science in general. Those who have been reading this blog for a long time know that I have frequently written about science and I like science. I also know how science and other areas of study are managed and manipulated by political and other forces. Recently there has been serious discussion about being able to sue people over denying man made climate change. We have seen this before. Not that long ago we saw a law suit against a teacher who taught evolution in America, it was called the Scopes trial. Wikipedia - Scopes Trial.  I find it amusing that now people seek to sue people for teaching creationism in school, nothing has changed we sue people for saying things that we disagree with. In the past history has done worse, people were jailed and outright killed for disagreeing with the beliefs of the day. Galileo was jailed for saying that the universe revolved around the sun and not the earth. I am less concerned with which science is correct than I am with the willingness by the establishment to punish people for having opposing views.

When the Stock Market Crashes the Media Will Blame Trump. Bet Me.

The stock market is going to crash again and probably this year. I am not the only one that knows this is coming. The media was going to blame it on the Federal Reserves interest rate hike; but, instead they will blame it on Trump and the "other side" will blame it on the Federal Reserve. This is not going to be a long post, it is really meant to be used later to show how insincere the media is and how they lie to us. This post will be referred to after the crash and after the blame game has begun. The truth is that the crash that is coming is coming because it is a great way to steal money.

Why Do We Pay For Non-Democratic and Non-Representative Primaries

We are constantly told and were taught in school that we live in a Democracy. We do not. The Constitution says we live in a Representative Democracy. We do not. Your choices are determined by a small group of wealthy people. It is only representative of their vote. If you think I am wrong, consider what is being discussed, finally, by the media. Lets look at the two major parties.

The Democratic party is not democratic, if you want proof consider the "Superdelegates", one third of the delegates that will actually choose the nominee are not selected by the voters they are chosen by the wealthy that control the party and vote as they are told to by that small group of people. This is why even though Bernie Sanders won the vote in election in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton was given more delegates than he got.

Now lets look at the Republican party, same thing different approach. Watch this.

Here is the statement from this Republican establishment representative, "The media has created the perception that the voters will decide the nominee." He then says that, "Political parties choose the nominee, not the general public."

Look, I stopped voting years ago. I stopped voting because of how the party system has been corrupted to limit our choices. I am voting in this election for the candidate who is less controlled by the media and the oligarchs that run this country. The truth is that Bush was a puppet, Clinton was a puppet and Obama is a puppet. I will not vote for puppets or support the oligarchs control over the political process.

Consider the billionaire who a year or so ago said that he believed that millionaires votes should count more than the vote of average people. If you forgot or were not paying attention, I will play the clip.

Specifically, this man said that if you paid a million dollars in taxes then you should get a million votes. He doesn't believe the votes of the rest of us should count. Oligarchs do not like democracy and they have been actively subverting it and the people have gone along with it.

If you think the media which is owned by these people believe in democracy or representational democracy, guess again and consider how most in the media want to see the Republican party ignore the wishes of the voters who support Trump. The conversation in the media, for the most part, is over how the oligarchs can change the rules of the Republican convention to pick the nominee if the voters support Trump or Cruz, which 80% of the voters do.

Here is an example of how the  media itself is against democracy. The Washington Post - To defend our democracy against Trump, the GOP must aim for a brokered convention.  Just think about what they are saying, to defend democracy we must stop democracy, we must violate the will of the voters behind the scenes in secret. Here is another example, Fox News - The new battle cry: Why can't the media 'stop' Trump? 

How anti-democratic is the media. Try reading this article. The Washington Post - The electoral college could still stop Trump, even if he wins the popular vote.  Here is the sub title, "Maybe — just this once — state legislators should use their constitutional authority and change how we elect the president." Yes, the Washington Post is seriously claiming that governors should choose people for the electoral college (the people who actually vote for their state's voters in the Presidential election) to pick people to vote against the will of the states voters.

It is not surprising to me that we live in a undemocratic society, what surprises me is that it has taken so long for the public to wake up to this fact.

UPDATE:

This is a couple of days after writing this particular post. I just read another article promoting the idea of violating the Constitutional intent behind the electoral college. I will comment on in later. I have decided to write some non-Presidential race stuff first.  I will say this much, many Republicans are refusing to do their job of advise and consent regarding Obama's nominee for the Supreme court. They claim to want a strict construction of the constitution and at the same time they are promoting voiding the voters choice in the primaries and are now considering using a new interpretation regarding the electoral college. It doesn't seem very consistent. Knowing the Democrat establishment they will ridicule the Republican parties efforts to ignore their voters and support having governors appoint people as delegates to the electoral college. I guess a Republican governor would appoint only Democratic delegates even if a Republican won the states votes and the Republicans would do the same. The party elites really don't like voters deciding anything.

The Death of the Republican Party and Who is to Blame - It Isn't Trump

The media and the establishment are blaming Trump, gay marriage and abortion for the death of the Republican party, it is a cynical lie, a denial of the truth. Trump is not killing the Republican party, if he was not in the race Cruz would have 70%+ of the vote, Trumps supporters are not going to suddenly switch to Kasich if Trump fails and Cruz's supporters will not support Kasich.  They both represent the middle class and working class, not the moneyed donors. People are not voting for Trump because he is not anti-gay, he is not running as an evangelical; but, Cruz is, yet he is still running against the establishment. This election for Republicans IS about changing the policies that only benefit the establishment and not working Americans.

Rubio and Kasich were the last of the establishment guys. Cruz is anti-establishment and his voters are to. If it comes down to a brokered election, Cruz's delegates will go for Trump. If the convention is brokered, it still goes to Trump. Cruz cannot effectively tell his people to support the establishment candidate, they will ignore him. There is no convention where Trump or Cruz's delegates vote for either Bush, Rubio or Romney. It will not happen.

The party establishment could regain control, it is very simple, they only need to put the needs and wishes of the majority of Republicans (workers and small business) above the wishes of the cleptokratic donors who only want tax breaks for themselves and to outsource jobs.

Why Liberals Should Be Okay With Sanders or Trump and Why Conservatives Should Be Too.

This blog publicly supported the Occupy Movement from the beginning. If you have been a regular reader than you may recall that I changed the title for a bit to "Occupy the Truth is Inside You". I also supported the Tea Party Movement mostly, I just thought they would be co-opted and focused to much on Gay Marriage. I have written that if Americans could find a way to bring the two movements together that we could do great things and stop the selling out of America.

We are divided over personal choices in lifestyle by the media rather than over economic and American interests. Tonight I want to discuss why and in which situation I would expect true liberals to vote for Trump and true conservatives to vote for Sanders. In a way the reason is the same for both sides.

To liberals I ask a couple of very simple questions. Liberals and conservatives are not that different. Most liberals want to see Americans do well and have good jobs, most conservatives feel the exact same way. Where they disagree tends to be over personal freedoms like the freedom to control one's body and have an abortion or smoke marijuana or have gay sex. No liberal voter or conservative voter would call for sending more American jobs overseas. No liberal or conservative voter would call for giving tax breaks to the corporations that outsource jobs. If you are liberal then you should know that the Democratic party has gone along with giving the wealthy tax breaks for outsourcing jobs to China. I know the Sanders supporters know this. Guess what, Hillary would continue what has been going on, she is owned by the big donors.

As for my conservative friends, if it comes down to Sanders versus Rubio or Kasich or even Cruz then you should vote for Sanders. You thought that trickle down economics would work; but, even Morning Joe had to admit that it has not, it has only led to more job losses. Remember when you were told that giving the wealthy tax breaks would increase jobs here? I think it is fairly clear that it did not.

On economic issues conservatives and liberals want the same thing, they want good jobs for Americans. The battle has never been between conservatives and liberal middle class workers, it is between the interests of the middle class and the wealthy. Since society split into the have and have not's it has been the most important battle except the middle class didn't know that, they believed the "establishment" and or so called "leaders" cared about the average citizen. They never did, this election is just highlighting that.

Breitbart - Huffington Post - HuffPo’s Grim: 54 Private Jets at Meeting to Stop Trump.  If you are a Sanders supporter and he loses to Hillary because the party elite steal the election with the super-delegates.

What Is Truly at Stake in This Election

Since the beginning of this election I have consistently sided with Sanders and Trump against the establishment . I see the fight being over whether or not this country will be an oligarchy or a democracy.  Ever since the 1970s we have been moving in the direction of an oligarchy where a very few pay for and control the elections and the politicians that they control. Ever since then we have seen our Presidential elections come down to a choice between the lesser of two evils who promise to improve the situation for the middle class and then don't. The political class at the behest of the wealthy have sold out the workers by outsourcing jobs and increasing taxes on the poor and middle class while giving tax breaks to the wealthy.

Lets face the simple fact a vote for any candidate who has a super-pac is a vote for oligarchy while the voices of the rest of us are drowned out and ridiculed by the establishment. If you don't understand that, then you are not paying attention. I have many Republican friends and none of them are racist; but, they all support Trump. We talk about this election everytime we get together. While the fight over oligarchy is rarely discussed in the media, when it is it is in favor of oligarchy. Think about this, the media is ridiculing the voters and not just the candidates. In a very recent post I linked to articles in respected news media that have flat out said that democracy is a bad thing. A bad thing for who? A bad thing for those in power.

Do you really think Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or Kasich is going to strengthen the middle class? Do you really believe they will respond to the needs of the majority of us? Let us first consider Kasich, he is in favor of giving amnesty to all illegal aliens already in this country, giving out millions of guest worker visas which will result in fewer jobs for Americans. Who does that benefit, the middle class or the wealthy? As for Marco Rubio, he supported the exact same things, doesn't that bother you. Cruz has favored guest worker programs in the past; but, now is calling for a wall to be built and tripling the size of the border patrol. The issue was originally raised by Trump in this election, you have to ask yourself why the others didn't raise it. I in fact raised this issue on this blog years ago, long before this election when congress was discussing denying citizenship to people who were born here, I vehemently disagreed with that plan. If you are born in America you are a citizen and should have the same rights as any other citizen, period.

As for Hillary Clinton, this is what she said, "'But the vast majority of the people who are here, we will give you a path to legalization if you meet the following conditions: pay a fine because you entered illegally, be willing to pay back taxes over time, try to learn English - and we have to help you do that because we've cut back on so many of our services - and then you wait in line.'" I hate to point this out but there a millions of legal American citizens that can either barely speak English or cannot speak it at all. In places that used to be part of Mexico such as Texas, Nevada, Arizona and California there are many places where the people still speak Spanish and there is nothing wrong with that.

Trump's policy is fairly clear, he wants to keep illegal immigrants out and while he says he would deport all people who entered the country illegally that will not be possible. An honest discussion over illegal immigration would block more illegal immigrants and grant amnesty to certain illegals; but, there would have to be a criteria. If it is automatic and the borders are not secure we will see a flood of new illegal immigrants trying to beat the deadline. That is just common sense.

In a democracy the people decide the immigration policy and not just the wealthy who want cheap labor at the expense of the citizens. In a democracy the majority decide on trade policy and tax policies; but, that is not happening. The establishment backs plans for accepting millions of illegal immigrants as a way to further lower wages while claiming to believe in overpopulation and a need to reduce our nations "carbon footprint". If we are truly overpopulated and want to reduce our nations carbon emissions, how does letting in millions of new people meet those goals? In particular why would support this agenda if you know we are losing jobs? That is the real issue and that is why the donor class is fighting the idea of the middle class choosing someone who disagrees with them.

Quantitative Easing Stealing From the Middle Class

I recently read an article in a financial magazine. It blamed the central banks for making the rich richer and the rest of us poorer because of Quantitative Easing (the over printing of money by the Federal Reserve). It then accuses the people behind it, the ones controlling the central banks (like the Federal Reserve) of being stupid and not learning from past mistakes. The article is wrong, the people that are printing the money intend to only benefit the wealthy. That has always been their intent and that is why Andrew Jackson sought to eliminate the precursor to the Federal Reserve. He said that governments did not need to borrow money from private bankers and he was correct.

Let me really simplify this. Wages have not gone up in the last ten years or so. During that same time the taxes on the wealthy have gone down about 50% (really). That means that the middle class is paying more as a percentage of their income than the wealthy. Those tax breaks were made on the promise that the wealthy would create more jobs in America, they did not, they increased outsourcing to China. Quantitative Easing, the lowering of interest rates by the overproduction of money will mean that the middle class pays the debt disproportionately to the wealthy. It was meant to steal money from the middle class and leave us with the debt. It is the final plundering of the American worker.