Tuesday, March 20, 2007
For example, I wrote a blog about Global warming and I had two liberals get on and call me bad names and said I didn't have the right or freedoms to use my freedom of speech to write a blog about global warming. Many other liberals replied to me in email, or should I say hate-mail, making threats of violence and death on my person, on my family, if I continue to write about global warming and other political issues. In fact, this is happening in the rest of the world to anyone who is skeptical of liberal issues like global warming. Merriam-Webster defines liberalism as "a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties" yet clearly these liberals seem to be against the protection of political liberties to even disagree or be skeptical of them. What part of issuing threats of violence or threats of death are parts of liberalism that believe in progress and the essential goodness of the human race? If I am getting global warming and other liberal issues shoved down my throat and told to accept them without even investigating them, how can I have the autonomy of the individual?
I mean really I have nothing against people who support global warming, gay marriage, the right to die, abortion, and other liberal issues, what I take offense to is having them shoved down my throat on a daily basis, and when I start to ask questions about them and ask for proof and evidence that is not biased in some way, I get threats of violence and threats of death and get called bad names. I mean how is that a debate? In a debate you attack the issues, not the people who debate the issues.
I mean take Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General. He fired eight prosecutors for having bad performance reviews. NPR covers the story and reports that there are over 3000 documents released and bad performance reviews that have been documented. Yet cannot produce any evidence that the firings were illegal or any evidence that the bad performance reviews or 3000 documents are false. Not only have liberals taken this issue, but they got republicans taking it as well. In any other job, someone fired for having a bad performance review would not even be an issue. If Gonzales was a Democrat or Caucasian this might not even be an issue. All of a sudden liberals are accusing Gonzales of wrong-doing because of his race, and now some republicans have joined in. Folks the USA is a melting pot of many races, and we should be united and not divided.
Take the Iraqi war, many liberals want to end the war and have sabotaged the war efforts. If FDR and Winston Churchill had to face what George W. Bush and Tony Blair are facing from the liberals, Hitler would have won World War II, because the liberals like Joe Kennedy would have had us pull out of Europe, appease Hitler and let him take over any part of Europe that he wants to. Radical Islamic Terrorists are no different, Saddam had concentration camps as well, and the terrorists kill people who refuse to support them just like Saddam did. No WMDS, and the liberals want a "do over", but in real life there are no do overs. If we pull out of Iraq before the Iraqi government is stabilized, we run the risk of terrorist taking over Iraq and using it for a base to launch attacks on the USA, Europe, Israel, and other nations. The liberals speaking out against the Iraqi war are modern day Benedict Arnolds. Sure, Benedict Arnold was a patriot just as much as the war protesters are, like them he loved his country. He loved his country so much that he was willing to sell it out to its enemies in an attempt to try and make it better or set things up so that he'd be in control. Benedict Arnold was a traitor as well, just like all of the Iraqi war protesters who are giving aid and support to the terrorists by lowering the morale of troops fighting in Iraq and dividing the nation in a time when it should have been united against a common enemy.
The way I see it, moderates, conservatives, libertarians are all more liberal than liberals are.
Monday, March 5, 2007
This kind of stuff happens a lot in liberal families. Pot by age 2, crack by age 4, methadone by age 6, cocaine by age 8, and heroin by age 10. LSD is not even an option until they are at least 12 and can handle the trips.
Sure all of that stuff fries brain cells, but then when you are a liberal the number of brain cells you have left doesn't matter anyway. You think with your emotions, not logic. You fabricate evidence and fudge numbers for pushing your own political agenda. It is more important that you feel good than follow a code of ethics and have morals, if you feel good doing bad things, liberals say go ahead and do the bad things. Your feelings are more important than being responsible for your own actions and behaviors, liberals claim. Anyone who tries to tell you to think about how your actions and behaviors affect other people are just fascists, claim the liberals. Moderates, Libertarians, and especially Conservatives are fascists because they use logic and reason and tell people to think of others before they act and take responsibility for one's own behaviors and actions. Hey hey slow down man, Liberals follow the Hippie movement of the 1960's despite this being 2007, if it feels good for you, you got to do it man. Experiment with drugs, they say. Don't let the man tell you otherwise. Why the Hippies gave blunts to their toddlers and everyone else as well as harder drugs. The more that Liberals give out illicit drugs to children, the more people will grow up to use them, and then that'll force government to finally legalize illicit drugs and using peer pressure they can be forced on everyone like alcohol and tobacco are forced on people by their peers as a way of being accepted by the group and being cool, daddy-o.
Well I myself am a moderate. I have a lot of friends who I lost because they used illicit drugs which eventually gave them serious physical and mental illnesses and then they committed suicide. They got started out as toddlers and some teenage relative got them hooked at an early age. I refused to use illicit drugs, so they shut me out of their lives. Now I have lived longer than they have, and I am left to talk about their sad stories. How they lost their jobs, how they had a criminal record, how they got sick, how they got poor, how they almost became homeless, how they eventually killed themselves. Then I think, what if, what if, what if they didn't get hooked in the first place? Then I think what if, what if, what if they legalize illicit drugs and it causes more people to get hooked and eventually kill themselves?
Let me make it perfectly clear, even if illicit drugs are legalized, I'd never use them. I consider them to be poison and I consider them to be addictive and deadly and can cost and ruin lives.
Please I beg you, don't get children hooked on drugs. See what happens when you do. Please visit these web sites:
Saturday, March 3, 2007
The 100% most effective form of birth control is avoiding sex as well. A woman cannot get pregnant if she avoids sex. If this happens a lot there won't be a lot of unwanted pregnancies any more.
The 100% most effective method of avoiding jail and rehab and probation from drug use is to avoid using drugs as well.
Just think of how much better humanity would be if people only had sex between a man and a woman to create a baby and if they don't want to create a baby they just don't have sex. The choice is a very simple one, and only responsible people would have a baby because they are best suited to take care of a baby because having a baby is a big responsibility.
Logically if you don't want the responsibility of having a baby, the smart choice is to not have sex at all. Logically only stupid and illresponsible people have sex and don't want to have a baby as a result. Why should society pay for birth control and abortions of people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions and behaviors?
The same goes for AIDS, having unprotected sex and sharing dirty needles with each other is not only stupid but illresponsible. Yet this is the main way that HIV/AIDS is spread. In rare cases it is due to a blood transfusion, but usually the donor shared dirty needles or had unprotected sex with a lot of people to get the HIV infection in the first place.
It is just natural selection when stupid and illresponsible people die of AIDS, die of illicit drug overdoses, or have so many abortions that it messes up their bodies and they eventually die.
Somehow their parents and their teachers have failed to teach them how to be responsible for their actions and behaviors. Not only that but Hollywood movies and TV shows teach people how to be irresponsible with bad role models that do immoral and unethical things.
In fact, most of the problems in the world are caused by illresponsible people exactly like who I have outlined in this blog. They are enemies of humanity and they bring the rest of us down and put a drain on society, the economy, damage our culture, and prove what useless sacks of flesh and bones they really are.
If you are one of those people, start learning from your mistakes and take responsibility for your actions and behaviors and just grow up and become an adult and quit acting like spoiled children.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
but the USA and Europe scientists claim it is warming and not cooling. Chinese scientists show the globe is cooling down and newspaper scans proving that scientists warned about global cooling more than 35 years ago and that scientists argued over if the world was cooling into an ice age.
Well today they are using the same data, only this time, get this, it shows that the average temp is going up instead of down. That if we don't stop using fossil fuels and buy carbon credits the world is going to get way too hot and turn into a desert. Lucky for us, they are able to sell us alternative energy solutions as well as those carbon credits so we won't feel guilty about ruining the planet. Apparently it seems that Selling carbon credits has become quite profitable more profitable than issuing stock and bonds. Many companies big and small and many individuals who are pro-global warming seem to be making billions if not trillions off of this sale of carbon credits.
Think about this logically, how can the same data show that the world is cooling and warming at the same time? I smell a rat, lots of rats, and they seem to be calling themselves scientists but they smell a whole lot like politicians to me. 2500 PHDs, yet I found that a lot of them hold PHDs in political science or some other field than climate science or weather. This is the false authority fallacy, you take people who are from a different field and you claim they are experts in the field you are trying to fool people with. For example, you might take a Football player who is an expert in sports, and try to pass him off as an expert on Opera event if he cannot speak the language used in the Opera. You might take an Actor, for example, and then claim he is an expert in Politics despite having no political experience. (This actually happens a lot in Hollywood) You might take someone with a PHD in History, and then claim he is an Expert in Medicine because he has a PHD and is called a Doctor despite having no medical experience. Yet in global warming, politicians are seen as experts like Al Gore despite Al Gore's bachelors being in government and his poor grades in science classes all of a sudden Al Gore is supposed to be an expert like he has a PHD in Science, yet the man clearly has no PHD in science and his test results showed that he had poor grades in chemistry and physics and other sciences. Gloabl warming is more political than factual.
Wow, Hammer, this sounds like a big scam to me, but what about all of those peer reviewed scientific studies? Those 2500+ scientists who tell us that global warming is real?
Simple, they screwed up the statistics and when they peer reviewed it they made the same statistical errors or overlooked it or just signed it off without even bothering to see if it was true because they too are pro-global warming politicians. Well how can you prove that? Simple, if the statistical data fits a bell curve you use a z-score test if not you use a t-score test for the hypothesis. The global warming data does not fit the bell curve yet they used the z-score test on it anyway, which is a fallacy. When testing the hypothesis using the t-score test, the hypothesis fails. Well then people, what happens when the hypothesis fails, yes the theory fails as well. Yet there is more evidence of wrongdoing and scams and lies and politics. Every statistical test will show you the margin of error, right? Yet the global warming tests don't list the margin of error. Why? Because it shows that the test has a margin of error that shows that the results could be misleading or incorrect. Every honest statistical test will show the margin of error, and if it does not, it is dishonest and you should not trust it. Every scientist should know that, but these guys are mostly political scientists and appear not to know that. A collection of scientific proof against global warming
shows that a lot of these political scientists have faked the data.
You will find that many of them own stock in oil and energy companies like Al Gore does, so when they put the global warming scare on people, it causes the price of oil and other energy to go up. Isn't that a bit like manipulating the market and insider trading? Then they lay that guilt trip on everyone. "Your carbon footprint is too big! You are putting out too much CO2, and it is going to doom us all in 30 years when you have 110 degrees Fahrenheit in the spring and summer months." Oh golly, the average person is upset because they own a SUV, and they have incandescent light bulbs and not LEDs or florescent lights. Just like the Roman Catholic church had a big scam in the middle ages of paying money for one's sins in order to get into Heaven, the pro-global warming people offer carbon credits for sale to help us get rid of our guilt for being a CO2 hog. Global warming is the doomsday story of Secular Humanism trying to force people to convert to their religion by abusing science to force their views and opinions on everyone and discrediting anyone who disagrees with them. Very much like any religion might have done. Science has been hijacked by Secular Humanists, Atheists, Ultra-Liberal Politicians, and pushed out real scientists over 40 years ago. Modern science is not real science any more, but just another religion? Why? Because the public is forced to believe in theories being true or have faith that they are true, and science was never about belief or faith and when it is, then it is just another religion.
Say, you don't think that these pro-global warming people are getting rich off of global warming, do you? Well I do, and I have just proved it. It is a scam, and a very good one at that because a lot of people are buying into it, and pro-global warming people are making billions if not trillions off of it. If these 2500+ scientists are getting rich off of global warming, don't you think that makes their peer reviewed studies sort of biased and gives them a motive to lie about them in order to get rich off of the research and the guilt they lay on people for global warming to force them to buy things to make the pro-global warming people richer? It is the global warming conspiracy and those 2500+ scientists are in on the conspiracy.
Yes, transferring dollars of the poor and middle-class people to the worlds richest liberals is the ideal way to fix global climate problems. If we make the world's richest liberals even richer then all of that hot air CO2 will magically go away.
In fact when independent scientists peer review the findings of pro-global warming scientists they often find flaws and statistical errors in the reports like I do. Anyone with a bachelors of science and classes in statistics and research like I have, can find those flaws and errors quite easily and show that the numbers have been fudged.
Even someone with a bachelors of science and elementary statistics and research classes can detect these errors, mistakes, flaws, fallacies, and see how the data was fudged in the many reports out on the Internet. It does not take a chef to see that a cake has fallen flat and it does not take a PHD in Natural Science to see the flaws, mistakes, errors, fallacies, and that the scientific method was not followed in these global warming reports. I myself never claimed to be superior to anyone, all I claim is that I found these things in various global warming reports on the Internet.
The NOAA is used quite a lot for research, they are part of the US Chamber of Commerce and more political and economical than scientific. Their findings did not follow the scientific method. There was no control and experiment groups, no dependent and independent variables either. Thus proving that the scientific method was not followed, which is common for most political groups and politicians. In fact The NOAA Geospatial Data and Climate Services Group has been discontinued for some reason. It used to show organizations that partnered up with the NOAA to collect the environmental and climate data, and most of them were making profits out of promoting global warming. Apparently part of some cover up in order to fool people into thinking that real unbiased third party scientists have collected the data and made the conclusions.
In fact the NOAA provides fudged numbers in hopes of proving more commerce to bring more income to alternative energy and carbon credits by spreading the global warming scam with false experts and false data to be used in various pro-global warming web sites and be used by thousands of pro-global warming scientists.
Data collected and used by the Russians and the Saudis show that global warming is false, but pro-global warming con-artists quickly dismiss those findings or ignore that they exist. In fact any scientific report that shows global warming is false is often discredited and the people behind the report have smear campaigns launched against them with personal attacks. Thus proving the politics behind global warming. For example the AMS threatened to decertify any weather person who refused to believe that global warming is true or showed any form of skepticism. Thus proving that global warming is being forced on the public. Because of this forcing of the theory on the public, it must be met with resistance and the people doing the forcing need to be exposed as the fraud that they are and what a scam they are trying to promote. The IPCC is promoted as the holy bible of global warming, yet bases a lot of data on NOAA, which has already been proven to be fudged and biased. Anyone who disagrees with the IPCC or global warming is labeled as an heretic and pariah and has a smear campaign launched at them and discredits them.
Global Warming Skepticism Part II: Of Oceans And Atmospheres
Newspaper scans proving that scientists warned about global cooling more than 35 years ago
I think these links more than prove that global warming is a scam.
Monday, February 26, 2007
So why aren't the USA united against a common enemy anymore and are fighting ourselves? Seriously WTF?
The answer is that the Liberals divided us, the Secular Progressives as well. At first they supported the war, and then they found excuses not to support it. They divided a nation when it needed to be united. They sabotaged the war effort and in doing so gave aid and support to the enemy, the terrorists the enemy of all humanity. Voting down body armor and voting down funding to train Iraqis to take the place of US troops. Creating blogs and editorial newspaper sites that have a constant Anti-USA ranting and raving. Secular Progressives like Rosie O'Donnell took the Islamic Terrorists as a cheap shot against Radical Christians who are not into terrorism at all. When all of these things started to happen, we begun to lose the war on terror. They keep on attacking by any means necessary, these Benedict Arnolds, these backstabbers. These attention whores like Cindy Sheehan who uses her son's corpse to promote her own biased political agenda with no regard on how it effects men and women in the US Military and lowers their moral and makes it easier for the enemy to kill them so more mothers can join her in suffering a loss of a child.
Do these people even think before they act? Do they really know the consequences of their actions and behaviors and the bad decisions they keep making that have doomed us all?
Use peaceful protests like Gandhi and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. used, the Liberals are using the wrong tactics. This is only making things worse.
Now that we know Iraq wasn't connected to 9/11 attacks or had WMDs, we need to pull out troops from Iraq and put them in Afghanistan or bring some of them home. Liberals are not going to accomplish that by name calling, getting violent, using personal attacks and other fallacies, and sabotaging the war effort. Some of these Liberals in giving help and aid to the enemy are the real war criminals. But lucky for them the Bush Administration does not care if they are, and doesn't stop them from protesting.
We need a change in this nation, we need hope, we don't need a lot of negativity and back stabbing. I expect more out of Liberals and hope the next Democratic President does better and fights this war better or at least resolves it. I got a feeling since the Bush Administration is so unpopular that the next President will be a Democrat. We can do better as a nation than we are now.