earthquake (1)

A Repeat of Natural Catastrophes May Be President Trump’s Biggest Challenge

This is an invitation for you to go to several web sites for important new information regarding the serious threat that now exists for historic and deadly earthquakes here in the United States. The first of these quakes may strike during the administration of President Donald Trump.

Hundreds of billions of dollars in property damage are likely and tens of thousands of Americans may perish in this major earthquake threat period that begins this year – 2017!

upheavalThis warning comes in the recently published book, “Upheaval – Why Catastrophic Earthquakes Will Soon Strike the United States.”

Based on ten years of research from a team of international scientists and a full year in the writing, the book exposes the clear and present danger the USA is under from devastating earthquakes that come around on cycles of roughly 100 and 200 years. The most damaging cycle, the 200 year cycle has just begun. These earthquake cycles are, according to the book, intimately linked to climate variation.

“Upheaval!” explains in understandable, non-technical, language why there is an over 80% chance of calamitous earthquakes once again striking the United States, affecting not just Alaska and California, but also the central and northeastern US and other states.

This rare and profoundly dangerous new geophysical era the US and the world has entered, will provide significant new challenges to every citizen of the US as well as to the new administration of President Donald Trump.

Please examine the following references:

1.The Veritence Corporation web site at http://www.veritence.net has a new ‘Commentary’ titled:

“A Repeat of Natural Catastrophes May Be President Trump’s Biggest Challenge.”

This Commentary focuses on past Presidents and the unanticipated geophysical and climate related disasters that occurred during their terms in office. The Commentary explains how these events were linked to changes in the climate and references the research from“Upheaval!” The Commentary goes on to support the opinion that President Trump may face some of the most damaging earthquakes in our country’s history that may cause significant human and economic losses – more than any other President has seen in our country’s history!

2.The eBook and the paperback version of “Upheaval!” are now available from Trafford Publishing and Amazon.com.

Please go to the Trafford web site for “Upheaval!” at www.upheaval2017.com for your copy of “Upheaval!” in paperback or the new eBook versions (ePub, mobi, and PDF formats), or

Go to the Amazon.com web site at www.amazon.com and enter the book title in the search block to be taken to the Amazon order page for both the paperback and ‘Kindle’ eBook  version of the book.

or

3.To get an autographed copy of “Upheaval!” please go to the web site of Veritence Publishing, Inc., at:  www.veritencepublishing.com

Go to the “Non-fiction Reading” page at the site for instructions to obtain a paperback copy via mail at the existing retail price with no S&H.

Here are some quotes from this important book:

“…a book that every American and every citizen of planet Earth should read and heed.” Dr. Rich Swier

From a USGS study: “More than 143 million Americans living in the 48 contiguous states are exposed to potentially damaging ground shaking from earthquakes.”

From the chapter on ‘The West Coast – Widespread Damage.’ We have:

“There is at least an 80% chance of more than one catastrophic earthquake of at least M 6.7+ hitting the state (of California) during the period 2017 to 2031 and an 80% chance of a catastrophic M 7.9 or greater quake striking the state during the same period.”

From the chapter on the “The New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ)”:

“Few cases reach the strength of evidence for a major earthquake anywhere in the USA more than the New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ). Like clockwork, the NMSZ has produced a region wide devastating earthquake or series of earthquakes with every 206 year solar hibernation or significant decline in the Sun’s energy output since the year 1450!…“The fact that another solar hibernation has begun should put every state in the area and the federal government on high alert.”

“Most Americans are unaware that should the NMSZ have a series of quakes similar to the 1811-1812 temblors during the last solar hibernation, the majority of the gas and oil that is delivered to the northeastern states will be shut off, possibly for many months.…resulting in a substantial and immediate power and heating oil crisis….”

For a repeat of the 1811-1812 NMSZ quakes, “FEMA estimates… 86,000 injuries and fatalities,…7.2 million people displaced,….Direct economic losses…nearly $300 billion, while indirect losses may be at least twice this amount.”

Regardless of your decision of whether to obtain the paperback or the eBook version of this important work, you are requested to notify any friends and family or business associates, media and government officials  you may have in the states listed below.

According to the book authors, they should begin at once to prepare for the worst geophysical period in our country’s history with the real possibility that some of the first destructive earthquakes could strike as early as this year:

Any Central and Northeastern state dependent on oil, natural gas and fuel from the gulf state refineries, including as a minimum, Ohio,Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.

Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington, South Carolina and Puerto Rico.

Anyone in the central Mississippi valley states including: Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, and Louisiana.

global-warming-crisis-cancelled

VIDEO: Princeton Professor debunks climate change propaganda

John Casey, author and former NASA rocket scientist, has taught me three facts about the climate:

  1. The climate changes.
  2. The changes are cyclical.
  3. There is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.

As John notes the only thing that mankind can do is prepare for these changes using good science and the best climate prediction tools to warn us of the coming changes.

The New American (TNA) interviewed Princeton University Professor William Happer on the notion that CO2 is a pollutant and is the cause of climate change, formally known as global warming. TNA reports:

Physics Professor William Happer discredits the negative effects of CO2 on the planet and whether or not climate change is man-made. He also goes into detail of why the United Nation’s models are incorrect despite their overwhelming confidence that significant warming is taking place due to human activity.

Erick Erickson in a column titled The Real Reason Leftwing Groups Are Freaked Out by Trump’s EPA Pick reports:

Leftwing groups are freaking out about Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s Attorney General and Donald Trump’s nominee for the EPA. It is safe to say that the collective meltdown over Pruitt is greater than over any other Trump pick. You probably have no idea why and it has nothing to do with climate change.

Superficially, progressives are saying that Pruitt is a climate change denier and has no business managing the agency he sued so often. But that’s just cover.

The real reason has everything to do with money.

With the blessing of the Department of Justice, the EPA has been going after major corporations and telling those corporations that they can pay a massive fine to the federal government or pay a lesser amount to various environmentalist groups.

Read more…

Its always about the money. Radical environmentalists are being funded by the EPA. The EPA is using its power to regulate and partnering with the DOJ to harm every business in America.

Well there’s a new sheriff in town and this government theft is going to stop.

RELATED ARTICLE: Washington Post Admits Science isn’t Settled on Climate Change of Warm Arctic, Cold Continents

think-big-trump

THINKING BIG: Report Sets Ambitious Science and Technology Goals for the Trump Administration

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The election of a new president offers the country an opportunity to remake America. The Potomac Institute, a science and technology policy think tank, has released a new report, “THINK BIG: Big Science, Big Opportunities, and Big Ideas,” outlining ambitious goals to drive innovation and economic development.

THINK BIG argues that innovation in science and technology are the keys to American economic strength and national security. Rather than a return to the infrastructure, economy, and healthcare systems of the past, the report calls for a vision for the future.

The report urges the new Administration to 1) develop policy based on the best available science and 2) use policy to foster the development of science and technology. The science and technology investment priorities identified in the THINK BIG report for the next Administration include:

America’s Future Infrastructure: Major public investments to achieve great things are a hallmark of American history. We need revolutionary infrastructure projects to drive America forward, not just fix what is broken.

Fostering American Industry Leadership: U.S. industrial policy should focus on fostering American innovation, helping American companies stay competitive in a global marketplace, and protecting intellectual property.

Revolutionizing Medicine: The American health care system should be revolutionized by leveraging technology and putting more power in the hands of patients.

Climate Engineering: We can use science and American innovation to engineer our way out of the climate challenge, using biotechnology and climate engineering.

“We will not solve these problems by investing in old technology and old ways of doing business. The only way to solve hard problems is to think big. Americans can do great things when we set lofty goals. If we think incrementally, we will only get incremental results,” said Michael Swetnam, Chairman and CEO of Potomac Institute.

ABOUT THE POTOMAC INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES

The Potomac Institute for Policy Studies is a non-partisan, independent, 501(c)(3), not-for-profit public policy research institute. The Institute identifies and aggressively shepherds discussion on key science, technology, and national security issues facing our society. The THINK BIG report is a product of Center for Revolutionary Scientific Thought (CReST), the Potomac Institute’s internal research and development and futures group, which uses innovative techniques to anticipate the policy impacts of emerging technologies.

man-on-the-moon-painting

End of the Dark Age: Trump to restart space exploration rather than fund climate hoax

What wonderful news — investing in actual science and divesting from leftwing lunacy. Some of man’s greatest achievements and scientific discoveries came from space exploration.

Obama changed NASA’s mission from space exploration to Muslim outreach. NASA’s Administrator explained that Obama had asked him to “find ways to reach out to dominantly Muslim countries.” (More here: Obama ‘s stone age)

TRUMP TO SEND MEN BACK TO THE MOON AND ‘EXPLORE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM’ RATHER THAN FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE

The president elect could put men on the moon once again – and use money from the climate change budget to do it

By Jeff Parsons, The Mirror, November 23, 2016 (thanks to Van):

Sending Americans back to the moon could also hinge on the appointment of Newt Gingrich, a high-profile Republican, to a top job at NASA.

Gingrich has been a vocal supporter of returning to the moon and has even spoken in the past about creating a permanent base there. He says that such a settlement could sustain around 13,000 people and possibly even become a new American state .

However, investing in a moon mission is likely to divert funds from NASA’s Earth Sciences division which researches climate change.

Moon Base

Moon Base (Photo: European Space Agency)

The division has received a 50% funding increase since president Obama took over. This year it received $1.92 billion at the same time as Obama proposed cutting funding for deep space exploration.

The Donald’s views on climate change are no secret. He has referred to it in the past as a Chinese hoax and claimed it was invented to limit American manufacturing and growth.

Therefore, it’s not much of a stretch to see NASA’s budgets and priorities overhauled during the Trump administration with a focus to putting astronauts back on the moon.

Speaking to The Telegraph , a former congressman who has advised Trump on space policy called NASA a “logistics agency concentrating on space station resupply and politically correct environmental monitoring.”

Bob Walker said that the incoming administration would “start by having a stretch goal of exploring the entire solar system by the end of the century.”

“You stretch your technology experts and create technologies that wouldn’t otherwise be needed. I think aspirational goals are a good thing. Fifty years ago it was the ability to go to the moon.”

EDITORS NOTE: This column first appeared on PamelaGeller.com.  The featured image is the painting The Last Man on the Moon
by Alan Bean

trump-pope

Pope warns Trump: Do not back away from UN climate pact

Pope Francis has issued a climate change challenge directly to President Elect Trump. The Pope, in thinly veiled speech, urged Trump not to withdraw the U.S. from the United Nations Paris agreement reached in 2015. The UN treaty has been said by critics to be “history’s most expensive treaty’,” with a “cost of between $1 trillion and $2 trillion annually.”

Pope Francis warned of the “crisis of climate change.”  “The ‘distraction’ or delay in implementing global agreements on the environment shows that politics has become submissive to a technology and economy which seek profit above all else,” Francis said, in what Reuters described as “a message that looked to be squarely aimed at” Trump.

Trump pledged to pull the U.S. out of the UN Paris climate agreement and defund and withdraw from the UN climate process. See: Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Speaking to a group of scientists, including physicist Stephen Hawking, the pope said in his speech that scientists should “work free of political, economic or ideological interests, to develop a cultural model which can face the crisis of climatic change and its social consequences”. The Pope has previously urged Catholics to pray for a UN climate agreement. See: Pope urges prayers for passage of UN climate treaty! Tells faithful ‘to ask God for a positive outcome’ for Paris UN agreement 

(Pope Francis greets Stephen Hawking (R), theoretical physicist and cosmologist, during a meeting with the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in Vatican, November 28, 2016. Osservatore Romano/Handout via Reuters)

Pope Francis also called for “an ecological conversion capable of supporting and promoting sustainable development.” In 2015, the Pope issued an encyclical on climate and the environment titled “Laudato Si: On Care for Our Common Home.”

In a 2015 Climate Depot Special Report revealed the Pope’s inner climate circle were. See: ‘Unholy Alliance’ – Exposing The Radicals Advising Pope Francis on Climate

The report noted: “The Vatican relied on advisers who are the most extreme elements in the global warming debate.  These climate advisers are so far out of the mainstream they even make some of their fellow climate activists cringe…The Vatican advisers can only be described as a brew of anti-capitalist, pro-population control advocates who allow no dissent and are way out of the mainstream of even the global warming establishment.”

Climate Depot also released the 2015 report: The Climate Skeptic’s Guide To Pope Francis’: Talking Points About The Pope & Global Warming – & See: Pope is a ‘climate lobbyist’ – Listen: Morano: ‘Pope is serving as chief religious lobbyist for man-made global warming & UN’

Climate experts who have looked at the UN climate agreement think Trump is correct to dismantle it. Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg wrote “Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all.”

Lomborg added that Trump withdrawing from the UN treaty “will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end” because even if you accept the climate claims of the UN, the agreement “will matter very little to temperature rise.”

University of Pennsylvania Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack  has also noted: “None of the strategies that have been offered by the U.S. government or by the EPA or by anybody else has the remotest chance of altering climate if in fact climate is controlled by carbon dioxide.”

Climate Depot Note: “In layman’s terms: All of the so-called ‘solutions’ to global warming are purely symbolic when it comes to climate. So, even if we actually faced a climate catastrophe and we had to rely on a UN climate agreement, we would all be doomed!”

Francis has faced considerable criticism for his climate activism from both inside the Vatican and out.

See: No Consensus inside the Vatican: Skeptical Vatican Cardinal takes a swing at Pope’s climate encyclical: The Catholic Church has ‘no particular expertise in science’ – The Vatican’s financial chief, Cardinal George Pell,

Flashback: Fox’s Andrew Napolitano: Pope Francis is ‘somewhere between a communist with a lowercase ‘c’ and a Marxist with an uppercase ‘M’

Climate Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs was blunt in his criticism of the Pope’s climate claims. “The Pope Is Wrong About Global Warming,” Briggs declared.

“The Pope declared it would by ‘sad, and I dare say even catastrophic,’ were particular interests to prevail over the common good at the upcoming climate conference in Paris.” It would be sadder if we signed over to politicians even more control than they already have to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. That would really hurt The Poor™. So why does the Pope believe all these demonstrably false things? Bad advice, in part,” Briggs wrote in 2015.

Related Links: 

Special Report: ‘Unholy Alliance’ – Exposing The Radicals Advising Pope Francis on Climate

Flashback: The Climate Skeptic’s Guide To Pope Francis’: Talking Points About The Pope & Global Warming

Pope is a ‘climate lobbyist’ – Listen Now: Morano: ‘Pope is serving as chief religious lobbyist for man-made global warming & UN’

Listen Now – Full 10 minute interview: Morano on the Pope on SRN News radio (9-23-15): ‘This is all about ideology and central planning and the Pope is now serving as the chief religious lobbyist for man-made global warming and the UN. And this is a very ill-conceived role for any pope to play. It’s hard to say the pope is being used, because he is willingly allowing himself to be used by the media and by the UN as a climate lobbyist.’

Pope turns lobbyist?! Urges prayers for passage of UN climate treaty! Tells faithful ‘to ask God for a positive outcome’ for Paris UN agreement – Pope Francis: ‘We believers cannot fail to ask God for a positive outcome to the present discussions, so that future generations will not have to suffer the effects of our ill-advised delays.’

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano comment: “No matter how nuanced and faithful to Catholic teachings this encyclical attempts to be, this passage where the Pope urges Catholics to ‘ask God for a positive outcome’ to the current UN global warming treaty process, will overpower every other message. The Pope is clearly endorsing a specific UN political climate treaty and essentially declaring he is on a mission from God to support a UN climate treaty. He even conjures up the comical concept of climate ‘tipping points’.” See: Flashback: Earth ‘Serially Doomed’: Climate Depot Factsheet on Inconvenient History of Global Warming ‘Tipping Points’ — Hours, Days, Months, Years, Millennium

Bloomberg Pope poll shows climate lowest of all issues: Only 33% of Americans agree with Pope’s warmism –

Bloomberg Poll: America Loves Pope Francis, But Not His Stance on Climate Change – Bloomberg Poll reveals 56% of U.S. Catholics believe the Pope’s ‘climate change’ push is a ‘bad direction’ for the church. Only 33% think it amounts to a ‘good direction.’

Study: Papal letter, Laudato Si’ fails to inspire Catholics on ‘climate change’ – “While Pope Francis’ environmental call may have increased some individuals’ concerns about climate change, it backfired with conservative Catholics and non-Catholics, who not only resisted the message but defended their pre-existing beliefs by devaluing the pope’s credibility on climate change,” says Nan Li, lead author of the study.

pope-francis-laudato-si

Podesta Emails: ‘Pope Is the Real Deal’ on Climate
THE POPE’S BOSS?! Wikileaks reveals Pope and Soros Forged An Unholy Alliance On ‘Global  – ‘In 2015, the Soros operatives, embedded in the Vatican, directed Pope Francis’ Environmental Agenda, by delivering for Soros and the UN, an Apostolic Exhortation on Climate Change, and a prized papal endorsement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Pope’s apostolic blessing on the Paris Climate Treaty. Soros won the environmental trifecta sealed and delivered by Pope Francis.’

SOROS

Pope Maker: The Soros Syndicate Partners With Vatican to Promote UN Climate Agenda

Pope Maker: The Soros Syndicate Partners With Vatican to Promote UN Climate Agenda – On March 13, 2013, Soros and his UN operatives understood that the climate instantly warmed and opportunities abounded with the new leftist Argentine pontiff. George Soros could not have imagined a more perfect partner on the world stage, one he has been searching for his entire career: a major religious leader pontificating as the moral authority for the environmental, borderless countries, mass migration, and pro-Islamic movements.

Climate Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs: ‘The Pope Is Wrong About Global Warming’ – The Pope declared it would by “‘sad, and I dare say even catastrophic,’ were particular interests to prevail over the common good at the upcoming climate conference in Paris.” It would be sadder if we signed over to politicians even more control than they already have to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. That would really hurt The Poor™. So why does the Pope believe all these demonstrably false things? Bad advice, in part.

Leonardo DiCaprio Meets With Pope Francis On ‘Need for Immediate Action on Climate Change’

Bjorn Lomborg: On climate change, Pope Francis isn’t listening to the world’s poor – Lomborg: ‘Those who claim to speak for the poor and say that climate change is the world’s top priority are simply wrong. The world has clearly said it is the least important of the 16 priorities the UN focuses on. And when those campaigners suggest the poor don’t know what’s best for them because carbon cuts will stop global warming from making all other problems worse, they’re wrong again. The poor are typically much better helped directly rather than via climate aid.’

No Consensus inside the Vatican: Skeptical Vatican Cardinal takes a swing at Pope’s climate encyclical: The Catholic Church has ‘no particular expertise in science’ – The Vatican’s financial chief, Cardinal George Pell, has taken the unusual step of criticizing Pope Francis’ groundbreaking environmental encyclical, arguing the Catholic Church has “no particular expertise in science.” Nearly 18 months after Pell was brought to the Vatican by Pope Francis and given a mandate to reform the city-state’s banking affairs, the Australian cardinal gave an interview to the Financial Times, whacking his boss’ landmark document.  “It’s got many, many interesting elements. There are parts of it which are beautiful,” he said. “But the church has no particular expertise in science … the church has got no mandate from the Lord to pronounce on scientific matters. We believe in the autonomy of science,” Pell told the Financial Times.

Cardinal George Pell on global warming: If it’s science, where’s the evidence?

Kudos! A religious leader who gets it! Flashback 2006: Catholic Cardinal George Pell: ‘In the past, pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in Co2 emissions’

Claim: Pope Francis Part of Amicus Brief Filed in Support of Teen’s Landmark Climate Change Lawsuit

Watch: Video of climate activists at Papal rally in DC reveals they don’t believe in God – ‘I’m more involved with the nature religions’ – ‘The best part, most of those in attendance didn’t even believe in God! And they certainly were not convinced by the Pope’s position on climate to think more critically about other matters faith and Catholic teaching, such as issues like abortion. If the Pope and the Vatican think that by taking a step closer to the left on climate change they would make people more open to serious matters of faith and morality, they are flat out wrong.’

UK Sun newspaper: Pope Francis committing ‘Holy Wrong’ – ‘He has no business banging on about climate change’ – ‘Stick to religion, Your Holiness’

Alabama’s climatologist Dr. John Christy: I would give the Pope some homework on global warming – Regs ‘will actually do nothing to change what the climate is going to do’

‘We have never lived in better times’: Aussie Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer: Heaven and Hell, the Pope condemns the poor to eternal poverty – This book criticises the Encyclical and shows that we have never lived in better times, that cheap fossil fuel energy has and is continuing to bring hundreds of millions of people from peasant poverty to the middle class and that the alleged dangerous global warming is a myth.

‘Only when Third World children can do homework at night using cheap coal-fired electricity can they escape from poverty.’

Pope Francis, Vatican Officials and Climate Skeptics Have a Common Enemy in United Nations Global Warming Agenda

Robert Redford: The Pope is right about climate change – Redford: ‘Flooding, drought, wildfires, and hurricanes – all you have to do is open your eyes to see the damage being done, and it’s going to get worse. We can no longer claim ignorance as an excuse for inaction. The jury is no longer out – climate change is real. It is not just a threat for the future, but happening here and now. And as Pope Francis so eloquently points out, climate change is a moral imperative that transcends politics.’

UN Armed Security Shuts Down Skeptics After Trump Event – SHREDDED UN Climate Treaty at Summit – Full Video of UN Climate Cops Shutting Down Skeptics

Climate Report to UN: Trump right, UN wrong – Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Bjorn Lomborg: Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all – Clexit ‘will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’ – ‘So Trump’s promise to dump Paris will matter very little to temperature rises, and it will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’

corn-in-gas-tank

The Real Reason We Have Ethanol in Our Gas by William O’Keefe

To get enough votes to pass the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, Democrats led by Henry Waxman made a deal with the corn lobby.  In exchange for its support, Congressman Waxman committed to an oxygenate provision—essentially a mandate to blend corn derived ethanol into gasoline.

As a way of disguising this requirement, Congress wrote the oxygenate provision in a way that made it part of a formula for gasoline—government gas.  Section 211 (k) of the Clean Air Act spells out in detail specific component levels for gasoline.  Just think, lawmakers acting like chemists, telling refiners how to make gasoline.

Prior to the passage of the 1990 Amendments, it was clear that initiatives to improve air quality would mean that tailpipe emissions would become more stringent.  In anticipation, the oil and auto industries undertook the most extensive fuel-engine research program ever conducted.  The objective was to determine the most cost-effective ways to meet lower emission standards and to provide research based data that could be used by government.

Since the mandate went into effect, almost 26 years ago, its cost has been about $200 billion or more.

The two industries briefed Congress on the research and made one primary request:  set emission standards to achieve Clean Air Act objectives but give the two industries the freedom to determine how best to achieve them.  That request was rejected because of a deal with the corn lobby.

Ever since then, motorists have been stuck with higher fuel costs and lower mileage, and consumers have been stuck with higher food prices. Corn production has continued to increase and Congress expanded the mandate to include specific volumes.  The cost of the ethanol mandate has been documented extensively as has the lack of real environmental benefits. In 2015, the Manhattan Institute published a report—The Hidden Corn Ethanol Tax—that concluded that in 2013 the mandate cost consumers $10.6 billion. Since the mandate went into effect, almost 26 years ago, its cost has been about $200 billion or more.

President-elect Trump has pledged to “drain the swamp.”  The ethanol mandate is a good place to start because it may be the most visible and lasting example of how crony capitalists create Baptist and Bootlegger schemes to enrich themselves with taxpayer dollars.

Ethanol manufacturers have perfected championing the environment with corn farmer support for both to get richer.  Bringing the ethanol mandate to an end would send a clear signal that campaign promises to take on crony capitalists was more than just rhetoric.  Changing the Washington culture has to break the link between special interests, lobbyists, lawyers, the alliance between Bootleggers and Baptists.

Republished from Economics 21.

graphene

Graphene Military Labs Unites Ambassador Dell Dailey and World Patent Marketing CEO Scott Cooper

Imagine computer screens that can be rolled into a tube for transportation, batteries that charge in seconds and hold their charge for days, gels that can soak up oil spills and radioactive waste, membranes that are impermeable to water and gasses, yet weigh almost nothing. It’s the world of graphene, the hottest new material to hit research labs in decades.

Ambassador Dell Dailey and World Patent Marketing's Scott Cooper

Up until now, Graphene Military Labs has been one of World Patent Marketing’s best kept secrets. It is the brainchild of Ambassador Dell Dailey and World Patent Marketing CEO Scott Cooper.  Graphene is commonly known as the “next wonder material” with the potential to revolutionize the world as we know it. Graphene Military Labs is moving forward on research for military applications, particularly in the area of infantry equipment and technology.

It has been known for some time that “invention powerhouse” World Patent Marketing isn’t the traditional product development company.  The composition of its military and politically influential Board of Advisers never really added up.  World Patent Marketing CEO Scott Cooper has always had close ties to Israel as a Director of The Cooper Idea Foundation and has always had unique access and close relationships with elements of the political, military and intelligence establishments in the United States. The need for such access was never known or discussed up until now. The company gave a “one-two punch” with last month’s release of its Military Defense and Security Inventions video supporting the US Fight Against the War on Terror and quickly followed up with the launch of Graphene Military Labs.

Ambassador Dell Dailey is a senior member of the World Patent Marketing Advisory Board and perhaps its most prominent member.  Ambassador Dailey was the head of the State Department’s counterterrorism office from July 2007 to April 2009 after a 36-year Army career.  The board consists of other notable figures including Vice Admiral and nuclear submarine Commander Al Konetzni, Former US Attorney Matthew Whitaker appointed by President Bush, General Nitzan Nuriel of the Israel Defense Forces, Dr. Aileen Marty, a member of President Barack Obama’s Advisory Council, Congressman Brian Mast, Pascal Bida Koyagebele, former Presidential Candidate for the Central African Republic and Eric Creizman, a legendary New York attorney.

“Graphene is one atom thick and 200 times stronger than steel.  It is one million times thinner than a strand of hair.  It is quite simply going to be the next gold rush.” said Cooper. “Sixty years ago the scientific community believed that graphene was theoretical and could not be isolated.  Today the Ambassador and I believe that graphene will lead to some of the greatest human accomplishments.  It’s going to push the boundaries of just about everything.”

300px-DellLDailey0908.jpg

“Graphene may be the solution the military has been waiting for,” said Ambassador Dailey. “First of all, it is light and durable. Adding graphene as a composite to standard equipment could reduce the weight and improve performance by a factor of four times or more. Besides, graphene may lead the way to the next generation of lightweight batteries, which charge faster and last longer.  And as we have started researching the material, primarily as a lightweight composite, I have become more and more intrigued by the sensor capabilities. Graphene patches can be designed that allow our soldiers to know instantly if an area is contaminated with radiation or chemical weapons, even when those levels are extremely low. And that can provide our troops the minutes they need to take precautionary action and protective maneuvers. We are talking about breakthrough military technology and invention ideas; that can save soldiers’ lives.”

Graphene May Produce the Strongest Lightest Military Technology Ever

Graphene is the strongest material ever discovered. It can be formed into a membrane that is so thin; it weighs almost nothing. A sheet that weighs less than a single cat whisker can support the entire cat. Graphene can support mass several thousand times its’ weight. It is far stronger than steel, it is quite simply when calculated by weight to strength, the most powerful substance on earth.

Graphene military technologies can create flexible screens.

Graphene is superconductive and can transfer information up 200 times faster than silicon. It has a low thermal rating due to its thin layer which provides amazing insulation properties.

It is being used in biomedical research in a variety of ways, including as a scaffold to help repair damaged nerves. Rats that were previously paralyzed with severed spinal cord injuries were able to heal and walk again fully.

And, it is being developed as a sensor for chemicals and pollution. It also has possibilities for research with DNA and cellular biology.

Graphene military technologies can be used in displays.

Graphene was first identified in the mid-twentieth century, but scientists had no way to isolate it in quantities that were large enough to use. It wasn’t until 2004 that Andre Geim and his research students, at the University of Manchester, found a way to isolate the substance in quantities that allowed them to do research. It was hailed as the first 2D material ever discovered. Graphene could form a solid sheet, just one atom thick.

Almost immediately, research labs around the world began working with Graphene. They discovered that this is one of the most bizarre substances yet created.

While it is the strongest material ever found, a little impurity or flaw leads to breakage. And even when perfect, it can be brittle and shatter like glass. A 2D membrane is stable and impermeable; even hydrogen cannot pass through the tight lattice that forms graphene. But, a 3D layer can be created that allows water and gas to go through it as if the graphene wasn’t even there.

Researcher with flexible graphene screen.

Because of its superconductivity, up to 200 times faster than silicon, there was early interest from computer chip makers. But their initial expectations foundered on another unusual property of graphene. It conducts quickly, but it can’t be turned off. Logic chips, the basis of modern computers, have to turn on and off. A switch that turns on and stays on isn’t worth a nickel with current technology.

Pushing the Boundaries of Military Technology

While graphene failed to be the sought-after replacement for silicon chips, it was quickly discovered to have a host of properties that are more than promising. The material may be revolutionary in many fields. Ultimately, it may completely change the equipment of infantry soldiers and dramatically increase their capabilities.

Graphene tubes used for nanotech.

“Our first introduction to graphene was on a project for the energy industry.” said Cooper, “Five years ago crude oil prices were over $120 per barrel.  Prices tanked within a few years to below $40.  The global energy industry is still in a state of confusion.  Notwithstanding the market’s optimism about an agreement being reached in Vienna at the end of November, the oil cartels are a perfect example of an industry that could greatly benefit from the commercialization of graphene.”

“Graphene carries an electrical charge and is already being used in cell phone screens. What I want to see is a touch pad for military purposes, that is flexible so that it can be rolled up like a scroll,” said Ambassador Dailey.

022_SC_2.png

Researchers are experimenting with what they call an aerogel. It isn’t soft like a gel, it is more like a sponge, it looks like a semi-translucent block. But it can absorb more than 600 times its weight of oil. Imagine what that could do to prevent environmental disasters. And they are working on graphene gels that absorb radiation. The possibilities are endless.

Cooper and Ambassador Dailey believe that graphene may eventually improve almost every item carried by an infantry soldier. They envision body armor and protection with graphene composites. Because it is impermeable to water and gasses, it is an ideal material for electronics housings and cases, and perhaps even for uniforms and protective gear.

Graphene offers possibilities for flexible and semi-transparent displays and military equipment coated in graphene has the potential to change color with an electric charge, and camouflage coatings may make tanks, planes, and ships, all but invisible to the human eye.

As Graphene Military Labs and World Patent Marketing push boldly into the future, the vision of Ambassador Dell Dailey and World Patent Marketing CEO Scott J. Cooper will help to give the military the fighting edge needed for safety and security, now and in the future.

awed environmental news

Trump election good news for science-based energy advocates

The election of Donald Trump (along with the Republican Congressional majority) may be the good news that science-based energy advocates (e.g. wind warriors) have been waiting for — for years now. For example, there is now a good chance that the wind energy PTC will be terminated!

This is like turning a super-tanker: it will take awhile for things to pan out. And make no mistake about it, the forces of entitlement will not go down without major fights. FYI, I’ve put together a few observations pertaining to the election (ranging from Science to computer models), and its consequences .

The latest Energy and Environmental Newsletter, is now available online.

Some of the more interesting energy articles in this issue are:

Gov’t Study: Wind Turbines Cause Sleep Loss, Stress, and Anxiety

Video: Infrasound — What You Are Not Being Told

What if the US had to pay EU energy prices?

Wind Project Ecological Assessments Fail to Reduce Risk of Bat Killings

Epstein’s University Energy Talk and Q&A

America Needs More Nuclear Power, Not Less

Wind an even Bigger Boondoggle than Ethanol

Wind Energy: Our Least Sustainable Resource

Some of the more informative Global Warming articles in this issue are:

Brexit2 Signals the End of the Green Age

What Happened to Climate Science?

University Stole Millions from Taxpayers by Faking Climate Change Research

“Global Warming” or “Climate Change”?

Peer Review — Why Skepticism is Essential

1920s Brit ‘fatally infected’ All Government Climate Models

Deaths Caused by Climate Change

Study: Does the World Need Climate Insurance? No

Myron Ebell Perfectly Suited for EPA

PS: As always, please pass this on to open-minded citizens, and on your social media sites. If there are others who you think would benefit from being on our energy & environmental email list, please let me know. If at any time you’d like to be taken off the list, simply send me an email saying that.

PPS: I am not an attorney, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or our WiseEnergy.org website) should be construed as giving legal advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent attorney when you are involved with legal issues.

nowthis_obama_interview_11022016_900px

President Obama Just Made the Dakota Access Pipeline Situation Worse

KEY TAKEAWAY

With a few words to a reporter, President Barack Obama just took the rule of law, crumpled it up, and tossed along a riverbank in North Dakota.

Here’s what he told NowThis about the recent actions by his administration and the protests over the Dakota Access Pipeline:

I think, right now the Army Corps is examining whether there are ways to reroute this pipeline. So we are going to let it play out for several more weeks and determine whether or not this can be resolved.

This was “resolved” months ago, after state and federal agencies signed off on the project.

The point of the rule of law is to protect rights by having a known, understandable, and certain process.

The pipeline’s builders, Energy Transfer Partners, did what they were supposed to do: They worked with state and federal regulators, applied for the appropriate permits, held local hearings with people concerned about the project—including Native American tribes—and spent years making adjustments to the pipeline’s route after hearing concerns—140 times in North Dakota alone(!) to preserve cultural sites and minimize environmental harm.

After following the rules, all state and federal permits were acquired (including from the Army Corps of Engineers). Energy Transfer Partners was awaiting a final easement from the Army Corp to go under the Missouri River, so building started.

Only then did anti-energy extremists rile up people to protest the pipeline by setting up camp near its construction, chaining themselves to equipment, and regularly confronting law enforcement, security guards, and construction workers.

We’re more than three-quarters through the game and President Obama thinks it’s okay to pull a Lucy and yank the football away from billions of dollars of investment and thousands of jobs by changing the rules of the game. We’re long past the point of no return for a project that went by the book.

For reaction to the president’s comments, here’s Rob Port, a North Dakota blogger who has been covering the story for months:

It’s worth keeping in mind that almost the entirety of this pipeline traverses private land. “In fact, DAPL needs almost no federal permitting of any kind because 99% of its route traverses private land,” Obama-appointed federal judge James Boasberg wrote in his September opinion rejecting arguments against the pipeline from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.

It’s actually more than 99 percent. It’s like 99.8 percent. Just 0.2 percent of this pipeline is on federal land.

But Obama, apparently, thinks that 0.2 percent gives the federal government the authority to re-route the 99.8 percent of the pipeline on private property.

Pipeline supporters also weighed in.

“While a reroute sounds simple enough, it is in fact incredibly difficult, time intensive, costly and may actually be impossible,” said Craig Stevens, spokesman for the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now. “It would require new easements, new environmental and cultural studies, and hundreds of millions in additional costs.”

Stevens added, it also puts future energy infrastructure projects as risk: “It would send the signal to other companies seeking to invest in the U.S. infrastructure that the country is closed for business. Because no company would invest the billions of dollars necessary to complete the already time-consuming and onerous regulatory process only to be subject to a re-review in the latter stages of construction and shut down.”

This is an important point. Over the next few years we’ll need all types of energy infrastructure. Renewable energy supporters should be worried at Obama’s words and actions. It’s not just about oil and natural gas infrastructure. Long-haul electrical transmission lines require similar permitting and public comment periods as pipelines. Often, they run into local objections.

When federal agencies upend the results of a fair regulatory process, everyone suffers.

Under this Obama administration precedent, a transmission line supplying customers with electricity from solar or wind that made it through the permitting process could be “rerouted” by presidential decree.

Don’t expect reliable energy supplies in that kind of environment. It doesn’t matter how much energy abundance you have, if you can’t get it to where consumers can use it—which is exactly the point of the extremist protesters. “There’s no reroute that doesn’t involve the same risks to water and climate,” Sara Shor, 350.org’s Keep It in the Ground campaign manager is quoted by The Hill.

Back to the rule of law. A letter from 22 pro-energy groups last month to the administration, including the Institute for 21st Century Energy, cited John Adams who wrote the United States is a “government of laws, not of men.” The letter continues:

This North Dakota project has complied with the procedures laid out in law, engaged in more than two years of federal review and has received the necessary federal approvals.

The previous decisions now being “reconsidered” were properly considered and made through a fair and thorough process on which the company and others are entitled to rely. In our “nation of laws,” when an established legal process is complete, it is just that—complete.

When your agencies upend or modify the results of a full and fair regulatory process for an infrastructure project, these actions do not merely impact a single company. The industries that manufacture and develop the infrastructure, the labor that builds it, and the American consumers that depend on it all suffer.

The AFL-CIO also understands the importance of abiding by a fair and certain process:

We believe that community involvement in decisions about constructing and locating pipelines is important and necessary, particularly in sensitive situations like those involving places of significance to Native Americans. However, once these processes have been completed, it is fundamentally unfair to hold union members’ livelihoods and their families’ financial security hostage to endless delay.

Along with damaging the rule of the law, with his words, the president has emboldened extremists like Bill McKibben who reject all fossil fuels use and pour fire on an already volatile situation.

In North Dakota, cars have been burned, explosive projectiles have been launched, shots have been fired, and hundreds of people have been arrested. (92% arrested have been from out of state, according to the National Sheriff’s Association.) Along the pipeline’s route in Iowa, millions of dollars of construction equipment has been destroyed.

This is chaos, and it could continue for “several more weeks.”

The Dakota Access Pipeline has been unnecessarily politiziced. Unfortunately, the president’s words and actions have only made things worse.

champaign-glasses

Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice!

Climate Depot’s statement on President Elect Donald J. Trump: 

“Climate sanity has been restored to the U.S. No longer do we have to hear otherwise intelligent people in charge in DC blather on about how UN treaties or EPA regulations will control the Earth’s temperature or storminess.

The election of Trump tonight was one of pure enjoyment for those concerned about silly, sovereignty threatening and purely symbolic climate policies that have been imposed on the U.S. without a single vote. Skeptics also enjoyed watching the grieving faces of the mainstream media on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, as the Trump election night shock sunk in.

“What they (the Democrats & warmists) are so afraid of is this: Trump is the first Republican Presidential nominee that has ever staked out a strongly science supported skeptical position not only on climate science claims, but also on the so-called ‘solutions’. (See: CLIMATE TRUTH FILE: 2016: Skeptical Talking Points from A-Z on Global Warming – Point-By-Point)

Trump is right on climate science and Trump rightly scares the hell out of the warmists.

Climate skeptics are ready to get down to the serious business of working with a Trump Administration to begin overhauling the U.S. climate and energy policy and battling the climate activists and their ill-gotten agenda achieved through bypassing democracy.

The time for a Clexit has arrived, a U.S. exit from the UN Paris climate agreement.

Trump can now move forward with his scientifically sound and coherent climate and energy policy that he laid out during the campaign.

Skeptics look forward to the following Trump climate agenda:

Donald Trump said on May 26, 2016

1) Trump pledges to rip up Paris climate agreement in energy speech

2) Trump railed against “draconian climate rules”

3) Trump said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement –

4) and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming.

End Morano statement

Background Info on Trump’s plans:

Breitbart’s James Delingpole analysis:

“To get an idea of the horrors to come for the greenies, look at how they reacted to the prospect of his new Environmental Protection Agency Dismantler-in-Chief Myron Ebell. Ebell is an old friend of mine who works on climate and energy issues at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The fact that he’s an old friend of mine probably tells you all you need to know about where he stands on global warming.

Here’s how Newsweek views him:

Ebell is sometimes described as climate denier-in-chief, and he revels in it, crowing in his biography that he’s been called one of the leading “misleaders” on climate change and “villain of the month” by one environmental group. David Goldston, a policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, says Ebell “doesn’t believe in climate change and wants to reverse the advances we’ve had in environmental protection and decimate—if not utterly destroy—the Environmental Protection Agency.” The Competitive Enterprise Institute, Ebell’s employer, “has done everything it can politically and through litigation to block any forward movement on climate and to try to harass anybody who is trying to get forward movement,” Goldston says.
Ebell is also the chairman of the Cooler Heads Coalition, more than two dozen nonprofit groups “that question global warming alarmism and oppose energy rationing policies,” according to the coalition’s website. Those positions line up nicely with Trump’s goals, which include “saving” the coal industry, reviving the Keystone XL oil pipeline and expanding offshore oil drilling.
Ebell has attacked nearly every aspect of Obama’s environmental policies and accomplishments. He has said that the president’s decision in September to sign the Paris climate accord—which commits nations to sharp reductions in the greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change—was “clearly an unconstitutional usurpation of the Senate’s authority” because treaties need approval by two-thirds of the Senate. (The White House argued that it was an agreement, not a treaty.) In a speech in August at the Detroit Economic Club, Trump said he would cancel the agreement and stop all payments of U.S. tax dollars to U.N. climate change programs.

Yup, greenies. That climate change gravy train you’ve been riding these last four decades looks like it’s headed for a major, Atlas-Shrugged-style tunnel incident…

Wash Times features Morano: The ‘time has come for a U.S. led ‘Clexit’ from UN the climate treaty’ – Marc Morano, who runs the skeptics’ website Climate Depot, said Tuesday that the cold feet on global warming shows that some countries are realizing the international climate agreement is “not in their best interests.” “More and more nations are realizing that the U.N. climate treaty is nothing more than an effort to empower the U.N. and attack national sovereignty while doing absolutely nothing for the climate,” said Mr. Morano, who debuted his film “Climate Hustle” during the negotiations in Paris. He said that the “time has come for a U.S. led ‘Clexit’ from UN the climate treaty.”

Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Trump echoes Climate Depot’s call to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Flashback January 2016 – Marc Morano wrote: “The GOP nominee for president in 2016 must present a basic plan to roll back Obama’s climate regulations. Here is a simple breakdown of what is needed:

Morano wrote in Jan. 2016: 1) Repeal all EPA climate regulations; 2) Withdraw the U.S. from any Paris agreement (nonbinding) ‘commitments’; 3) Withdraw the U.S. from the UN climate treaty process entirely; 4) The U.S. should defund the UN IPCC climate panel;

Donald Trump said on May 26, 2016: 1) Trump pledges to rip up Paris climate agreement in energy speech – 2) Trump railed against “draconian climate rules” – 3) and said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement -4) and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming.

Via MSNBC – May 26, 2016:

Trump railed against the “totalitarian tactics” of the Environmental Protection Agency. He pledged to dismantle the EPA entirely in an April town hall, although he referred to it at the time as the “Department of Environmental” and “DEP.” He assailed Hillary Clinton for saying in March that fracking projects would be unlikely to pass muster under her environmental regime.

“Hillary’s agenda is job destruction. My agenda is job creation,” Trump said.

He railed against “draconian climate rules” and said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming. Trump has repeatedly called climate change a “hoax” in the past…”

Flashback January 14, 2016 – Climate Depot’s Marc Morano on dismantling UN/EPA climate agenda:

Morano: “President Obama laid out his final vision in the State of the Union address. Republicans need to get their act together quickly in order to prevent Obama’s climate legacy from being cemented.

Morano: “The GOP nominee for president in 2016 must present a basic plan to roll back Obama’s climate regulations. Here is a simple breakdown of what is needed:

1) Repeal all EPA climate regulations;

2) Withdraw the U.S. from any Paris agreement (nonbinding) ‘commitments’;

3) Withdraw the U.S. from the UN climate treaty process entirely;

4) The U.S. should defund the UN IPCC climate panel;

‘Yes! We Should Defund The UN IPCC': ‘It seems along with 17 years of flat global temps there is some evidence that we are witnessing some cooling on global warming hype & hysteria in DC as well’

5) Start praising carbon based energy as one of the greatest liberators of mankind and the best hope for the developing world’s poor.

Anything short of this clear and comprehensive approach will lead to failure and guarantee Obama’s climate policies will become permanent in the U.S. The Republicans need to get a coherent plan and articulate their course of action.

End Morano excerpt. 

Cheers! WaPo Editorial Board: ‘A President Trump could wreck progress on global warming’

hillary-eyes

Majority of Physicians and Surgeons: ‘Hillary Has Abnormal Eye Movements’

TUCSON, Ariz., Oct. 25, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Concerns about Hillary Clinton’s health have been subdued after her three debate performances. She presented her ability to survive 4-and-a-half hours on a stage with Donald Trump as proof of sufficient stamina to serve as commander-in-chief.

“She evidently intended this as a joke, although I suspect our combat veterans would not be amused,” states AAPS executive director Jane Orient, M.D.

Videos are, however, circulating on the internet, from her rather brief and rare appearances in public, which are purported to show pathological eye movements.

“These are quick, episodic, and inconsistent,” states Dr. Orient, who is an internist. “So we decided to ask doctors on our email list to have a look at one of the videos.

A helpful tool is to paste the URL into http://RowVid.com and watch it at half or quarter speed.”

Nearly two-thirds of respondents said they saw abnormal movements. Only 15% did not, and 21% were unsure. There are long segments in which the eye movements appear normal.

About 60% of those who saw abnormal movements thought “the cause could be a potentially disabling neurological condition,” and none of them were willing to say that it isn’t.

Such movements signify an abnormality in portions of the brain that coordinate the eye muscles. There is a long differential diagnosis. Possibilities the respondents suggested include increased intracranial pressure (she is at risk for that because of her history of head trauma and a transverse sinus clot); a drug effect; or a chronic degenerative neurological condition. Parkinson’s disease is mentioned—with drug treatment concealing most manifestations but causing the eye signs.

Doctors were asked which tests would be helpful, and 37 responded. The most common one was a full neurological examination by unbiased specialists, including a neuro-ophthalmologist.

“A neuro-ophthalmologist could do a structured examination, but it might be normal at a moment in time. The video clips need to be explained,” stated Dr. Orient. “A cardiologist might do an electrocardiogram that is perfectly normal—but he will also look at a 24-hour monitor that may show a transient life-threatening rhythm disturbance.”

A collection of additional clips in slow motion has been posted.

“As Hillary revealed to the public, perhaps illegally, the President may have only four minutes to respond to a nuclear threat,” said Dr. Orient. “The public needs to know whether she is concealing a serious, progressive illness that may impair memory, reasoning, alertness, or ability to think quickly at a critical time.”

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a national organization representing physicians in virtually all specialties and every state. Founded in 1943, AAPS has the motto “omnia pro aegroto,” which means “all for the patient.”

abortion-not-a-womans-choice

Why Abortion is Not a Woman’s Choice

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court truncated the democratic process of dealing with abortion from state to state in 1972, the issue has been defended as being a “woman’s choice.”

Apologies for bluntness, but this is an immoral position.

There is really only one question in this debate: Is that which is within a woman’s womb a person, or is it a blob of protoplasm that might one day be a person?

Secondarily, if it is the latter, at what point does the transformation take place? From these answers will flow rational and moral clarity on the question of abortion.

In 1972, you could at least rely on scientific ignorance to claim the fetus was equivalent to a tumor. Although even then, the medical profession knew because of what came out of a late term abortion or miscarriage. That’s probably why so few doctors ever have performed abortions. It was not particularly rational, considering women feeling the punch of an elbow or kick of a heel — person parts. But the general public could squint its eyes real hard and blur to the idea that it was not a baby until birth.

Technology clarifier

But now, with the advance of technology, we can see clearly the baby in the womb. We can measure brain waves, heart beats and most heart-rending, we can watch the baby’s response to threat and pain. Planned Parenthood harvested human organs from “aborted fetuses” and then sold them. Human organs. That’s a pretty compelling case for that being a person in the womb.

The world understands that carrying a baby to term and giving birth and then having a child to raise is an enormous undertaking. That’s why it is supposed to be done in families, in which a mother and a father are committed to each other for life. It is meant to be a shared undertaking and a thing of beauty — not something to be destroyed when inconvenient or accidental.

The magnitude of the task notwithstanding, however, the science is overwhelming now on the morality of ending a pregnancy.

Considering what we know today about the fetus in the womb, it is morally indefensible to any longer consider that fetus anything other than a person. The obviousness of this point — made by Planned Parenthood, no less, selling human body parts — is a primary reason why every attempt at debate on the issue is deflected. It is a woman’s choice. It is between a woman and her doctor. It is about women’s health. It is reproductive health care and so on. Staying on the point of this being the purposeful death of a baby is a losing position, so it must be shifted from that.

Now, it is no longer simply squinting to make abortion acceptable, it is eyes tightly closed while repeating “woman’s choice” and “women’s health” arguments. In this one area, defenders of a “woman’s choice” are arguing that it is okay to kill a baby. There is no way around it. It is obfuscation at the highest level, for the lowest purpose.

Is early on OK?

Now perhaps you can see this when the baby in the womb is developed, but not so clearly at the earliest moments of conception. After all, even science does not suggest brain waves or heart beats in the first days.

Those two measurements of whether a person has died or is a live still show up at three weeks for the heart pumping blood and six weeks for brain waves to be measured. The problem immediately encountered here is exactly when should we say, with life-and-death certainty, that the non-human fetus becomes a human. Any point along the line is going to be arbitrary, meaning that we will be assigning death sentences based on an arbitrary line. That does not really hold moral water, either.

Remember, pro-choice activists and leaders support a woman’s right to kill her baby up until it exits the birth canal. That is the position of Hillary Clinton, the Democrat Party and some in the Republican Party. Sometimes they chant woman’s choice, sometimes they make the viability argument. It is not a human with rights until it is viable outside the woman, by which they mean the umbilical cord has been cut and it can survive on its own. But this also holds no intellectual water as the baby is still totally dependent on the mother’s, someone else’s, care for many years.

In the end, the “woman’s choice” defense of aborting unborn babies is morally and intellectually indefensible.

baby-premy

Pro-choice says a woman has a right to kill this if she so chooses, through several subterfuge arguments. Let your own eyes decide if that is moral or immoral.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Does Raising the Minimum Wage Help the Low-Wage Earner?
Was Jesus a Socialist?
4 Reasons the Government Cannot Run the Economy
Black Lives DO Matter! Therefore Promote Faith, Family
BONUS: Questions for a Moderator from a Different Worldview

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on TheRevolutionaryAct.com.

vote-no-on-2-logo

Growing Opposition to Florida’s ‘Legalize Pot’ Amendment 2

Florida’s leaders continue to come out daily in opposition to Amendment 2.

Most recently, Attorney General Pam Bondi made it clear that her position has not changed:

In addition, both the Florida Sheriffs Association and the Florida Police Chiefs Association have shared their positions on Amendment 2:

The Florida Police Chiefs Association stated:

You can read the Florida Police Chiefs Association’s full Press Release and theFlorida Sheriffs Association’s full Resolution here and here.

They are joined by the President of the California State Sheriff’s Associationwho has urged Florida voters not to make the same mistake that Californians did:

mortoncountysheriff_dakota_access_arrest

North Dakota Sheriff: Dakota Access Pipeline Protesters Are ‘Hostile,’ ‘Armed,’ and ‘Not Peaceful’

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

If the Obama administration thought their actions to halt part of the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline would calm things down in North Dakota, they were mistaken. If anything, protests have intensified.

Dozens of people have been arrested by local law enforcement, and the Mercer County Sheriff Dean Danzeisen, bluntly stated to the Obama administration, “These are not peaceful protestors.”

They are armed, hostile, and engaged in training exercises which can only be intended to promote violence, whether on Corps property or elsewhere. These rioters have left Corps and Standing Rock property on multiple occasions and travel several miles to enter private property to assault employees, private security personnel, and damage property that will take millions of dollars to repair. A number of these individuals have been observed brandishing weapons.

One anti-pipeline protester went on a local North Dakota radio show to talk about “lawlessness” he saw taking place inside the camps.

A union leader in North Dakota spoke to local North Dakota radio about the hostile environment created by pipeline opponents for those working on the pipeline:

Pam Link of the Local 563 chapter of the Laborers International Union of North America was on air with my colleague Jay Thomas on 970 AM WDAY. She spoke with Jay about the issues the pipeliners are going through with the #NoDAPL protests.

She painted an ugly picture, describing one incident where a worker filling up his truck at an area gas station was “beaten” by masked protesters.

“I wish people could imagine the situation our union workers have been put in,” she said, adding that hundreds of the workers are from right here in North Dakota.

“No one should have to be going to work threatened and put in an unsafe position,” she added.

Link said workers routinely show up at their work sites along the pipeline routine to find equipment damaged. Not that they get much of a chance to address the damage. She also said workers are routinely run off by protesters just a couple of hours after starting their work days.

There are a “handful of workers who have left the job,” Link said, though added that most of the workers are sticking and want to get the project completed.

This hostile environment has expanded and is affecting farmers and ranchers far from the pipeline’s route. Doug Goehring, North Dakota’s Commissioner of Agriculture, told North Dakota blogger Rob Port, the protests are anything but peaceful:

He said farmers and ranchers in areas even as far away [sic] as 20 or 30 miles from the protests are feeling “frustration, fear, anxiety, and tension.”

“It’s just like living down in an area that seems like a battle zone,” he said.

“These are innocent people who are caught in harm’s way,” he added.

He said he’s spoken to farmers and ranchers from the area who have sent their children to live in the Bismarck/Mandan area during the protests because they don’t feel safe. He said ag producers are having troubles harvesting their crops or tending to their cattle because of the protest activities and the law enforcement response they provoke.

In one instance he said he spoke to a farmer who lives 20 miles away from the main protest area who had a protester chain himself to a light pole in his farm yard.

“This is terrible,” he told me.

It should be noted that one of the protesters’ key talking points–that the pipeline will destroy cultural artifacts–has been upended. North Dakota State Historical Society’s archaeologists have found no evidence of cultural items on the pipeline’s route.

Both the energy industry and labor unions turned up the volume on the administration’s delay of Dakota Access Pipeline.

The presidents of the International Union of Operating Engineers, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Laborers’ International Union of North America, United Association and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers sent a letter to President Barack Obama demanding that he “stand up for American workers” and allow construction to continue, NBC News reports:

The unions, which collectively represent 3.5 million workers, said the weeks-long halt in construction of the pipeline at Cannon Ball, North Dakota, had caused “hardships for thousands of families.” The unions said 8,000 of their members are currently working on the $3.7 billion project.

“The intervention by the Departments of Justice, Interior, and the U.S. Army to indefinitely halt a project that is more than halfway constructed and has received state and federal approval raises serious concerns about the future of infrastructure development in America, and the livelihoods of our members,” the group wrote in a one-page letter.

The energy industry reinforced labor’s points. On a press call, the American Petroleum Institute’s Robin Rorick warned that Obama administration actions threatened the rule of law saying it set “a dangerous precedent for other non-oil and gas projects like roads, bridges, tunnels and electricity transmission lines.”

Last month, Matt Koch at the Institute for 21st Century Energy also noted it is “also unfair to the communities along the pipeline route that support the project, and all Americans who stand to benefit from increased energy and economic security once the project is completed.”

Both industry and labor reminds us that the pipeline went through years of reviews at the state and federal level that included many opportunities for the public and interested groups to offer input. Permits were lawfully approved under that thorough process.

When asked to issue an order blocking pipeline construction, federal Judge James Boasberg looked at the facts and concluded the Army Corps of Engineers followed proper procedures and bent over backwards to gather input from the public, including Native American tribes who could be affected. He denied issuing an injunction, yet an hour later, the Obama administration chose to halt construction near the protest area, putting us in the situation we’re in.

The United States is a nation of laws. This administration should stand up for the rule of law, law-abiding construction workers, and local communities and not extreme anti-energy groups.It should stop impeding this necessary energy infrastructure project.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

What If… America’s Energy Renaissance Never Actually Happened?

MORE ARTICLES ON: ENERGY

heart-rate-monitor

Projections of mortality and causes of death, 2015 and 2030

This infographic displays data from the World Health Organization’s “Projections of mortality and causes of death, 2015 and 2030”. The report details all deaths in 2015 by cause and makes predictions for 2030, giving an impression of how global health will develop over the next 14 years. Also featured is data from geoba.se showing how life expectancy will change between now and 2030.

All percentages shown have been calculated relative to projected changes in population growth.

MEDIGO – Mortality and Causes of Death. 2015 and 2030: a comparison

How much longer will we live in 2030?

Life expectancy worldwide has increased since the start of the century and will continue to rise, with areas considered to be ‘developing’ seeing the biggest increases. Despite this there will still be a huge disparity in life expectancy around the world.

MEDIGO – Mortality and Causes of Death. 2015 and 2030: a comparison

Top 10 killing diseases in 2015

Although progress is being made in some areas, there are also reasons for concern. Of the top 10 causes of death in 2015, 7 will cause even more deaths in 2030.

MEDIGO – Mortality and Causes of Death. 2015 and 2030: a comparison