When our Secretary of State (who has no scientific credentials) says man caused Climate Change is as real as gravity, you know he’s desperate.  He said we don’t question gravity and we don’t question ice freezing at 32 degrees Fahrenheit.  But, he asks, when scientists tell us man is causing climate change, what right do people have to say they deny that “elementary truth”. 

I’ll be happy to tell him, gravity can be proven by empirical evidence every time it’s tried.  And although we all agree ice freezes, it doesn’t always freeze at 32 degrees F.  Freezing depends on temperature and pressure.  But, water will freeze at low enough temperatures every time.

No one, scientist or civilian, is disagreeing that climate changes.  It has since the beginning of time and it will until the end of time…..with or without man.  Where we disagree is the cause.  Kerry wants us to believe man is the cause. He says “scientists” tell us that. No, not all scientists do.  More than thirty one thousand of them, just in the United States, signed a petition saying they disagree.  www.petitionproject.org

We have the right to deny that “elementary truth” because it isn’t an elementary truth.  We have the right to free speech and to be skeptical, especially, when every scary prediction, the climate models they rely on have made, has not happened.  There is no empirical evidence that man is causing global warming or climate change. There are many natural phenomena that have a greater effect on temperature than man. And there have been many widely accepted scientific conclusions that have been overturned, such as the causes and effects of high cholesterol. That’s why we have the right to question it. Science requires skepticism.

However, even as the ominous predictions, one by one, fall by the wayside, the Warmers have no intention of giving up.  They are doubling down…..which very well may lead to the demise of their agenda. 

The Warmers are getting so desperate they are flailing around grasping for anything to show man is causing global warming.  The models they use to justify legislative action are failing as the predictions don’t match observed temperatures. Their predictions are getting more dire, more absurd and less tethered to reality. Everything and anything is blamed on Climate Change.  Claims are being made that Climate Change caused ISIS.  It causes everything from asthma to prostitution.

Their tactic now is to attack, slander and destroy the skeptics.  Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) and Senators Boxer, Markley and Whitehouse have sent letters to universities demanding they disclose the sources of funding for the researchers who are skeptics of anthropogenic Climate Change.  Any scientist who has testified in front of Congress is being targeted.  The validity of their research isn’t being questioned, the source of their funding is. Interestingly, the sources of funding for Climate Change alarmist aren’t being questioned.

Dr. Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon, Physicist at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics was targeted after a peer-reviewed article was published in Science Bulletin entitled, “Why Models Run Hot: Results from an Irreducibly Simple Climate Model” that made a strong case that the climate is less sensitive to CO2 than most models suggest. When it became the most downloaded paper in the journal’s history and news organizations took notice, the climate alarmists came after him claiming he didn’t disclose the source of his funding.

The problem with their accusations is that funding for research is given to universities directly. Negotiations are between the university and the donor, not the scientist and the donor. Considering the political climate at universities today, it’s hard to imagine a requirement that the research favor fossil fuels would be acceptable.  The university then takes about 60% of the funds and distributes the rest to the researchers.

It is also important to point out that Dr. Soon’s research and findings had been highly respected for decades. He wouldn’t have been hired by such a prestigious institution, had they not been. It is only when he questioned the validity of the climate models that his integrity was questioned.

Climate alarmists, on the other hand, are not asked to provide the sources of their funding. I wonder who funds them? The EPA, perhaps?  http://junkscience.com/2015/05/05/media-beats-up-willie-soon-but-turns-a-blind-eye-to-epa-funded-researchers-shilling-for-epas-biggest-rule/

Recently, Dr. Judith Curry testified to Congress that recent data and research supports natural climate variability caused by the sun, volcanic eruptions, and large-scale ocean circulations, having a greater effect on climate than man. She testified that efforts to link dangerous impacts of extreme weather to human-caused warming are misleading and unsupported by evidence. She pointed out that America’s commitment to the UN to reduce CO2 emissions by 28% would prevent three hundredths of a degree centigrade in warming by 2100. (is that worth spending trillions and lowering our standard of living?) https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/house-science-testimony-apr-15-final.pdf

Another example is Dr. James Enstrom.  He exposed the study by a fraudulent researcher with a degree bought on line, that claimed diesel particulates in the air were causing thousands of deaths a year.  CARB (California Air Resources Board) used the study to justify banning diesel engines from California. Dr. Enstrom wasn’t wrong but he was fired because his research no longer aligned itself with the university’s ideals.

These are but a few of the examples of the desperation on the Left.  Their dire predictions haven’t materialized and the public is losing interest.  They can’t argue with the evidence that the earth is not warming, so now they’re trying to kill the messenger…….I almost feel sorry for them.

Al Gore and former Mexican President Filipe Calderon recently called for spending  $90 trillion to redesign every city in the world to be car free.  There has been little or no discussion of this in the main stream media.  Why is that?  If anyone on the right were to make such an absurd suggestion the media would still be laughing and mocking them endlessly.  http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/23/al-gore-spend-90-trillion-to-ban-cars-from-every-major-city-in-the-world/

Al Gore is the Godfather of Global Warming aka Climate Change.  He is the Pope of the Climate Change Religion. He flies all over the world telling people the sky is falling and far too many people believe him. I went to protest a speech he was giving in Beverly Hills and people were lined up around the block to hear him.  We held signs discrediting his claims. A few people came and spoke to us in gentle tones as if they were speaking to a, not too bright, child. They believed we were just too simple minded to understand the science (as if they did) and if they just pointed us in the right direction we’d see the light.  When one of our group mentioned they had a PhD and gave them some factual data that was clearly over their head, they turned hostile.

So, let’s examine this proposal of Al Gore’s. He wants to spend $90 trillion to redesign every city in the world to take us out of our cars and private property and into apartments in high-rises (hmmm, sounds like Agenda 21, doesn’t it?).  He’s actually serious about this.  Does he know there isn’t $90 trillion in the world, (the closest estimate I could find was between $50 and $60 trillion)? So, he wants to take, nearly, TWICE as much money as there is in the world to combat “Climate Change”.  Think about that for a minute.  How would it even be possible to spend more money than there is? But say we could spend $90 Trillion to rebuild all the cities, why would we?  It certainly couldn’t be done without using fossil fuels. And all that construction would put more CO2 and real pollutants in the atmosphere than cars could in hundreds of years. If “climate change” were the immediate threat Gore claims, this would exacerbate it.

If we spend more money than there is in the world to rebuild cities we already have, how are we going to pay for all those bloated government employee union salaries, benefits and pensions? How are we going to support all the poor? How are we going to pay for the school breakfasts, lunches and dinners? The free college? Obamaphones? Obamacare, etc., etc., etc?

Anytime someone tells you, “The debate is over”, it’s a sure sign, it isn’t.  That should be a BIG red flag.  Science is a never ending debate. It requires constant questioning. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of things considered “settled science” that have been proven wrong.  How many years did they say the Piltdown Man was the missing link……until he was proven to be a hoax?  How long has the Big Bang theory been sold as fact but is now being questioned? http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/31/Scientists-Evidence-of-Big-Bang-theory-fails-to-space-dust/1171422712058/

An English High Court ruled that Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” contained eleven “factual inaccuracies” that had to be pointed out to students before it could be shown in schools.  And yet, he won the Academy Award and the Noble Prize for his fraudulent claims. Why does anyone believe anything this man says?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/TenWays/story?id=3719791&page=1

Recently, an English newspaper, the Telegraph, published an article that explains how the temperature data has been being “altered” to support the Global Warming claims. We need to remember 178 countries signed Agenda 21 and governments fund the data collection. The trouble for the Global Warming salesmen is that groups not funded by governments also collect the data. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html

Determining the average temperature of the world is not an exact science to start with.  Anthony Watts, through his website www.wattsupwiththat.com did a study of the temperature stations and found so many irregularities that their temperatures couldn’t be relied on to be accurate. Some were located in the middle of parking lots, or in shaded areas, or near machinery or on top of waste processing tanks.  There are so many factors that effect temperature and it is too complicated for the average person to understand. That’s a Perfect Storm for fraud.

In 2008 Gore said the poles would be ice free in five to seven years. Well, it’s seven years and the poles haven’t melted. In 1993 he predicted all the coastal cities would be flooded by 2000 due to melting poles.  Again, not the case.  The media tried to use hurricane Sandy to validate his claim but Sandy wasn’t caused by melting poles or rising sea levels.  Sandy was a hurricane. Hurricanes are not rare.  The fact that Sandy’s name starts with an “S” means there were 18 hurricanes before it. Hurricanes have happened since the beginning of time and will continue to happen.  And, in fact, here have been fewer hurricanes the last few years, not more.

Regardless of the predictions, made by Al Gore, proven wrong over and over, the media, Al Gore, and the UN funded IPCC will continue to push for car-less cities and government control over the activities of all living creatures in the name of “Climate Change” because Progressives never give up. NEVER.

Although there is more ice at the poles than in decades, no warming in more than eighteen years, none of the climate model predictions have come true, and polar bears are thriving, let's pretend, for the sake of argument, that man is causing "global warming" aka “Climate Change”.

What can we do about it?

According to Al Gore, the President, and the Secretary of State, "global warming" is such a crisis that we must act immediately, or life as we know it will end. They are right about that. If we do what they suggest, life, as we know it, will most certainly end. We will have no cars, we'll be cramped into tiny city apartments, and there will be less than one billion of us on the entire planet. But I digress.

If, in fact, man is causing "global warming", it isn’t just an American crisis, it’s a world crisis. And wouldn't a world crisis require a Global Governance to solve it? Wouldn’t it require all the countries to abide by the same laws and restrictions? America is not the problem. We have the largest number of environmental regulations, and we have the cleanest air and water in the world. There may be areas of the country that aren’t as clean as we’d like, but, overall, we are a clean country, as are the rest of the Western nations. Wealthy countries can afford to keep their environment clean. Just compare them to poor countries. The wealthier the nation, the cleaner.

A parent recently reported that their child was being taught in school that by the age of two an American child has a carbon footprint larger than a Tanzanian adult has their entire life. I don’t doubt that is true, but let's examine why. An American child is most likely born in a hospital, and taken home in a car, to a house with running water, electricity, heat, air conditioning, and a comfy bed. A Tanzanian is most likely born with the help of a midwife, and lives in a mud hut that is heated by burning dung. A Tanzanian’s life expectancy is 48 years. What does that suggest? That we should live like Tanzanians? How much are you willing to do without?

If, in fact, man is causing "global warming", then shouldn’t our President and Secretary of State be talking about shutting down China and India’s coal plants, rather than American coal plants? According to http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/nov/20/coal-plants-world-resources- institute

China is building about one coal plant every ten days, and India nearly as many. China has a coal mine and plant that is larger than all of Los Angeles! (http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/theres-a-coal-base-in-china-the-size-of-la)

As we shut down coal plants that provide 44% of our energy, putting thousands out of work, and bankrupting entire towns, 35 other countries are building coal plants faster than we shut ours down. If "global warming" were the crisis our President tells us it is, shouldn’t his priority be to stop these 35 countries from building more coal plants? Shouldn’t his priority be to advance clean coal plants? Coal is a seemingly inexhaustible source of cheap energy, and much more reliable than expensive, unreliable alternative fuels.

The President gave a speech in which he admonished America for using 25% of the world's energy resources. As though that's an evil thing! His implication was that our use of energy somehow magically prevents other nations from using their own energy resources.

Why does America use "so much" energy? Well, not only do we live in houses with running water and electricity, we also manufacture things. We invent things. We explore space (or used to, anyway). All that takes energy. Would you prefer we don't do any of those things? Would you prefer we still lived in the horse-and-buggy and candlelight age? Would you prefer not having a computer in your pocket? Would you prefer not having indoor plumbing?

It is the nature of man to explore, to invent, to question, to push himself beyond his limits. If we were to listen to the President, we would have to completely deny all our natural instincts. We would have to regress, de-industrialize, and do without. How much are you willing to do without? Will you give up your car? Do you want to bring your holiday groceries home on a bus? 

Could you do half the things you do on a daily basis if you had no car? 

What about your private property? Would you prefer to live in a house with a yard, or a tiny apartment? Have you noticed nearly every new building is a multi-use building with commercial first floor and apartments above?

If "global warming" were the crisis our government insists it is, the only solution would be Global Governance, where all the countries shut down all fossil fuel energy plants immediately. But it’s only Western countries that are shutting things down. We are being de-industrialized through taxes and regulations. Our government is driving our industries away, to countries whose regulations and taxes are not so punitive, where they can compete on a level playing field. The life’s blood of Western nations is cheap, abundant energy. Restricting its production restricts our economy. Australia has realized this and reversed its position on "global warming" policies. Someone whined to me about the “thuggish” new Prime Minister of Australia repealing Cap-and-Trade. As if the Australian people didn’t elect him to do exactly that! It was the will of the people that repealed that law, not a “thuggish” Prime Minister!

We all need to understand what took place at the last Climate Summit. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) said its goal is to reduce CO2 by 100% in the next 35 years. ONE HUNDRED percent? Seriously? Are you prepared to hold your breath forever? CO2 is what living things exhale. Reducing it by 100% would certainly eliminate all fossil fuels, but it would also eliminate all plants, animals, and humans. 100%, that’s what they want us to agree to. How can they accomplish that without Global Governance? How is it even possible with 35 countries building new coal plants.

Lets be clear, we all want clean air and water. We all want a clean environment. But CO2 is about 0.03% of "greenhouse" gases, and man only contributes about 2% of that. That is so insignificant as to be negligible. Hence, even if man is contributing to “global warming”, it’s something we could adapt to. But what we are being asked to do is completely turn our economy and way of life upside down. It’s like going after a fly with a shotgun!

Of course we all want a clean environment. But it’s only the Western countries that are restricting their use of energy. I would ask all my "Progressive" friends, what are they willing to do without? Isn’t Global Governance the only way to get other countries to comply? Is that what they are after??

Here is a link that shows how temperature records have been changed to support the "global warming" theory. It includes news articles from the warmest times that back up the true temperatures: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/05/13/hansen-the-climate-chiropractor/

Most people who keep tabs on politics are familiar with the UN's 1992 blueprint for global totalitarian slavery which goes under the name "Agenda 21."  To recap, the UN's 1992 "Agenda 21" plan, whose implementation is already under way in America, seeks to impose a global totalitarian government and "New World Order," under the ideological umbrella of "green" collectivism.  Its stated goal is to depopulate all rural lands at gunpoint, to confiscate all private property at gunpoint, to force the entire human race into what would essentially be vast urban concentration camps at gunpoint, to regiment all human activity from cradle to grave at gunpoint, and to designate all outside land as off-limits to any and all human presence, in perpetuity, at gunpoint.   ...Among many other evils beyond the scope of this post. 
 
A good overview can be found in the 2005 article "Sovietizing America," by Michael Shaw and Edward Hudgins:  http://www.atlassociety.org/tni/sovietizing-america-how-sustainable-development-crushes-individual

The only people who have apparently never heard of Agenda 21 are our elected politicians, most conspicuously the "Republican leadership" in Congress, who should be leading the charge to expose and dismantle it along with its host organization, the United Nations.  Unfortunately, there is a sizeable clutch of "Republicans" - a.k.a. RINOs - who are not only not fighting Agenda 21, they are actively helping to implement it.  Eliminating those RINO traitors from government along with the Democrat-Socialists is what our votes on November 4th are for.  (We began that task in earnest in 2010; we must continue the Congressional housecleaning this November, to completion in 2016.)

Most people are familiar too with Obama's recent, massive land-grab, announced on May 21, 2014: the confiscation of 500,000 acres of the American people's land in southern New Mexico, which Obama has labeled as the "Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument."  In signing this land theft into binding law atop his ten previous land-grabs, Obama boasted "I’ve preserved more than 3 million acres of public lands for future generations. And I am not finished."
See "Local officials blast move by Obama to set aside 500,000 acres in NM":
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/21/new-national-monument-nm/
 
In March of 2014 the EPA unveiled its latest self-granted expansion of coercive power - an arbitrary broadening of the definition of "waters of the United States" to encompass virtually any body of water, "public" or private, from major rivers down to the rain puddles in your backyard.  Here's a report on this EPA power-grab from Congressman Lamar Smith, Chairman of the House Committee for Science, Space and Technology:
http://science.house.gov/press-release/smith-epa-s-draft-water-rule-private-property-power-grab

On March 30, 2009, just two months after taking office, Obama signed the "Wilderness Protection Bill," a combination of 170 separate "green" measures comprising 1,200 pages of regulations, to declare over 2 million acres in 9 states as essentially untouchable shrines to the "green" religion.  Per the "Wilderness Act" of 1964, it prohibits all development and even the use of mechanical transportation on all designated land, down to and including bicycles.  Apparently the wheel has been an offense to Holy Mother Gaia since caveman days, and she needed placating. This bill was a leftover "bipartisan" deal that was first hammered out under Bush, but signed by Obama. 
 
And yes, the scumbaggery has come from Democrats and Republicans alike.

- In June of 2006 President G.W. Bush declared 140,000 square miles - which translates to 89.6 million acres(!) - of ocean around Hawaii as a "National Monument," and designated a total of some 3.85 million additional acres of land in the continental US as "wilderness" over his two terms;
- President Clinton, both by executive fiat and in league with Congress, confiscated a rough total of 26.9 million acres of the American continent for government over his two-terms;
- President Reagan, either alone or with Congressional involvement designated a total of 12.6 million acres in 31 states as off-limits to human action during his two terms;
- President Carter declared 66 million acres, in Alaska alone, as "wilderness," subject to the quasi-religious strictures in the Wilderness Act above, with his personal total being 79.53 million acres taken from the American people during his term of office.

Less than a month after his May land-grab Obama unveiled an even greater outrage, his plan to expand Bush's 89.6 million acres of ocean surrounding the Hawaiian islands to a proposed total of... 500.5 million acres. That's:  half a billion acres of marine fisheries, confiscated and rendered off-limits by government at the stroke of a pen. 
See: "Obama Aims to Create World's Largest Ocean Preserve":
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/17/obama-will-reportedly-expand-protected-areas-pacific-ocean/

Agenda 21 is of course raw evil - a blatant, misanthropic assault on human rights on a global scale.  The central component of Agenda 21 - the government theft of virtually all land and waterways from the people who own it, and their expulsion from it - is a reversion to Medieval feudalism, where an all-powerful class of nobles owned the land while the rest of the people were subdued as rightless serfs, existing at the pleasure of the powerful.   Western Civilization emerged from the Dark Ages to the Renaissance and Enlightenment through a gargantuan philosophical struggle, and America's Founders fought the War of Independence against what was then the greatest superpower on Earth, to throw off the last vestiges of Medieval monarchy.   The establishment of property rights for all individual people, not of nobility, was and is a crucial foundation of human rights, worldwide. 
 
So here we are at the dawn of the 21st century, and a collection of the world's most evil tyrants on lower Manhattan are implementing a plan to drag the human race back into Medieval serfdom, by brute force - with current and former American Presidents and Congressmen serving as its willing puppets. 

Note the fraudulent platitudes and bromides that are repeated as the excuses for these land thefts:  "Preserving for future generations," to "guard their sanctity" for "everyone to share,"  and the perversity of "getting things done for the American people."   When politicians in Congress and Statehouses across the country comment on these land thefts, the proponents echo similar platitudes, while opponents, the would-be defenders of human rights, can only seem to muster half-hearted complaints about such pragmatic surface issues as "red tape" and "providing a corridor for drug traffickers," etc.

Let none pronounce the words "agenda" and "twenty-one"; let none mention the concepts of "human rights" and "property rights."

A new approach:  Offense, not damage-control
 
The time is long overdue to turn the tide, decisively, and dismantle this whole post-Soviet totalitarian charade, in total.  
 
Yes, these land-grabs are an imposition of crushing government controls; yes, if left to stand they would have disastrous human consequences on several fronts.  But at its core, this continuing land-confiscation program is an attack on the right to property - a right without which the rights of life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness cannot exist. 
 
As Republicans committed to destroying the last deadly vestiges of collectivist tyranny, including neo-Feudalism, and to restoring Constitutional rights as the absolute foundation for the present and future civilization, we must adopt an agenda at least as radical in the direction of individual rights and liberty as the collectivists' agenda has been radical in the direction of slavery. 
 
Here are some aggressive proposals we should adopt and fight for, to completion - as Republicans, as Democrats, as Independents, as American individuals:

1. The nationwide abolition, in full, of all residential property taxation, ideally via a new Constitutional Amendment. 

Malta, Lichtenstein, Croatia, Thailand, Monaco, Fiji, the Cook Islands, New Zealand, Israel, Dubai, Bahrain are just a few of the countries where there is no residential property taxation at all, or at most a one-time tax on purchase or sale of a residence, but no perpetual, annual tax on property.   The United States of America, once the leader of the free world, has a less-just tax policy than Croatia?  Than Malta?  Than Dubai?   America should be leading the way by example - in abolishing the barbaric anachronism of residential property taxation entirely, as a new human rights paradigm for the entire world.  We must fight to make that abolition a reality.
 
As with any other property right, the right to one's residential property is not a right to be given a "free" home at someone else's unchosen expense, but the right to take self-generated action to earn and to keep one's residence, unmolested by the coercive intrusion of others.  The home one has earned and which one owns is as vital a component of one's right to life as the food one has earned for physical sustenance.  The practical consequences for economic prosperity are many and varied, but as a single example: with apartment owners similarly relieved of residential property taxation, even apartment renters would see their cost of living drastically reduced as a secondary consequence - freeing that part of their budgets for the eventual purchase of houses of their own.  Currently, the idea of home ownership is unthinkable for millions of Americans - not just because of the outrageous building costs resulting from "green" regulations and other heavy-handed government controls, but because of the simple fact that so long as residential property taxation is tolerated, nobody in America actually owns their home.  This must change, permanently.
 
The entire concept of residential property taxation is a negation of the right to home ownership at its root - it's government exercising brute force to designate itself, not you, as the de facto "owner," in perpetuity, of the home you have paid for - to which landed nobility you must either maintain rent payments or get thrown out onto the street. 

In a direct sense, residential property taxation is the relegation of the American individual to serfdom.  We must step back, take a look at the militant injustice of property taxation, and ask ourselves not only why we put up with it, but why we allowed an imposition so thoroughly alien to human rights to be initiated in the first place.  Residential property taxation must be abolished, in total - with an eye toward the eventual abolition of all property taxation, residential, commercial or otherwise.  If governments have to find ways to end their profligate spending when this "revenue stream" is removed, Tough.  Our right to our own homes is something we never should have surrendered, and must take back, by reason, by ethics, by the most fundamental principles of human rights.


2.  A nationwide review, divestiture and selloff to private American citizens, of all government-held lands not directly related to physical government facilities. 
 
In 1999 the Cato Institute published a comprehensive blueprint for such a privatization, so the idea is neither new nor impossible.   The pdf file of the proposal - Policy Analysis #363, titled "How and Why to Privatize Federal Lands" by Anderson, Smith and Simmons - is available here:  http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa363.pdf

The government has never had a justification for confiscating the vast acreages of the people's land that it currently holds.  As the Cato blueprint states, "Fully a third of the land area of the United States is owned by the federal government."  With the Obama juggernaut stealing massive additional chunks of the American landscape, the ridiculous is fast transforming into the obscene, and must not only be stopped but reversed.   We must divest Federal, State and Local governments nationwide of all land unrelated to government facilities.   Other than the land that the Capitol building and other government buildings sit on, and the land that the various branches of the armed forces use for their facilities, governments from Washington D.C. down to City Hall have no business possessing any of the people's land.   Even National Parks and National Monuments (monuments with identifiable, valued features, as opposed to featureless tracts of land arbitrarily designated by politicians as "monuments" to facilitate land confiscation,) can be maintained and preserved far more conscientiously, competently, and with zero tax expense, by private individuals and institutions.  As documented in the Cato study and by many, many others, the government "owners" of valued national landmarks have done an abysmal job of stewardship and even basic maintenance.

The Cato study serves as an excellent starting point for implementing this divestiture of government lands, but it's predicated almost entirely on surface issues of stewardship and economic practicality.  What it misses is the entire context of human rights and of the dangerous assault on human rights that "Agenda 21" and the entire panoply of "green" causes represent.  Stewardship of the land and economic improvement have aspects rational, desirable and moral, but the core of this issue hinges on the recognition that there are political factions in America and elsewhere that are actively seeking to enslave people via the confiscation of private property, and that such evil must be pulled up by the roots - via the comprehensive removal of all land holdings by the government and restoration of those lands to the people.

3.  The de facto abolition of the "United Nations," including but not limited to: 
 
The cessation of all funding of that organization, the expulsion of that organization from American soil, the nullification of all "treaties" and agreements entered into under its auspices, the public declaration of America's non-recognition of any legitimacy in the "UN"'s claim of authority over sovereign nations or any claim of legitimacy in its quasi-military forces - and the strong recommendation to all of our allies that they follow suit.   Let that remaining clutch of the world's tyrants stare at each other across plastic tables in the banquet hall of a greasy-spoon diner on Madagascar or Kiribati and plot their cartoon world-conquest schemes from there.  If at some time far in the future it wishes to demonstrate that it has caught up with the concept of civilization and has permanently expunged the demonstrably evil from its member rolls, we could perhaps grant it a hearing for consideration as a good will organization and send an occasional emissary to hear what they have to say.   But as the "UN" currently stands, its continued presence on American soil, much less our and our allies' active participation in it, has traversed from what had been merely unjustified to: irrational and now to demonstrably dangerous.   US out of the UN; UN out of the US.   It's an idea whose time has come.

The first time I heard the claim that man was causing global warming, I thought it was a joke. When I realized that not only weren’t they joking, they were deadly serious, I had to know why. They claimed CO2 was responsible for all kinds of evils, but I knew that CO2 was a nutrient necessary for life on our planet. I also knew that CO2 is emitted by every living creature in nearly everything we do. Reducing CO2 would require de-industralizing our country, destroying our economy, and reducing crop output. It would lead to deaths of living creatures. I determined to learn as much as I could about “global warming”, and find out what was behind it. For the last ten years or so, I have been reading, researching, and listening to actual scientists who study these disciplines.

This July I spent three days with hundreds of scientists at the 9th International Conference on Climate Change. These are experts in their fields, and they showed us a myriad reasons why Anthropogenic Global Warming is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on man. You can watch videos of the Conference here: http://heartland.org. I recommend it highly.

One of the first things I discovered when I started researching global warming was a petition signed by more than 31,000 scientists in response to the Kyoto Accord. This petition said that warming and cooling cycles were normal for the planet, and that man’s activities have very little, if any, effect on climate. This demonstrated to me that there is no “consensus” of scientists on the matter. The petition was circulated only in the United States, so I would imagine the number of signatories would be even greater in the worldwide science community. You can see the petition for yourself: http://www.petitionproject.org.

I printed out the 31 pages of California scientists who signed the petition. I like to show it to people who try to tell me that “97% of scientists agree man is causing global warming”. They never fail to be shocked.

I was excited to meet the scientists who created and circulated the petition when they received awards at the conference. One of them, Dr. Willie Soon, has PhD's in astrophysics and geoscience. He sat at my table at the conference. The group explained that when they circulated the petition, many leftist forces tried to sabotage it by sending in petitions signed by bogus people. That way, they could point out these fake signatures, and cast doubt on the petition’s validity. Too bad for the spoilers - the authors of the petition are no dummies! They caught every fraud, and vetted every signer!

Shortly before the conference the news broke that NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) had been manipulating temperature data. Here is one of the articles that I read about it: http://nypost.com/2014/06/24/global-warming- skeptic-says-government-manipulated-temperature-data/.

We tend to trust information from agencies such as these, but, remember, they are hired and funded by our government. If our government has an agenda, they would certainly not allow NOAA to deviate from it. NOAA seems to forget that other scientists across the country have been keeping data logs of their own. Several of the speakers showed us the data released by NOAA before and after 2000. It shows NOAA lowered the temperatures from the 1930s (the hottest period in US history) and raised the temperatures from the 1990s, just so they could claim 1998 as the peak hottest year. 1998 was not at all the hottest year, but since there weren't any SUV’s to blame in the 1930s, that decade's true data didn’t fit their narrative.

The Conference started with a reception where we met and mingled with the speakers. Lord Christopher Monckton is the rock star of climate change “skeptics”, and he was surrounded by admirers and reporters at every turn. The reception was followed by dinner with speakers such as Patrick Moore, PhD, founder and ex-member of Greenpeace, and John Coleman, former weatherman for “Good Morning, America” and former CEO of the Weather Channel.

Patrick Moore spoke about founding Greenpeace and protesting against nuclear power, whaling, and the killing of baby seals. He is still an environmentalist, as are all of us who want clean air and water (which we currently have). Dr. Moore now agrees that nuclear power is the cleanest, safest form of energy. He pointed out the tactic of scaring the public to serve a political agenda. The movie “Clear and Present Danger” scared America away from nuclear power. Dr. Moore showed us pictures of his early years in the movement. He resigned from Greenpeace when they started pushing the Global Warming meme, which he knew wasn’t true.

John Coleman spoke about starting the Weather Channel, and then resigning from it when the rest of the board voted to change data to support the Global Warming agenda. This was a theme that ran all through the Conference, and was emphasized over and over. The data we are being given has been manipulated to fit a political agenda. For us to make intelligent decisions, we have to have factual information.

Another scientist at my table was William M. Gray, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science, and expert in tropical meteorology. His specialty is hurricanes. In his talk on “Climate Change and the Hydrosphere”, he showed us evidence that there are actually fewer hurricanes now than in the last 30 years. Here is a great video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZVE8JHxRAc.

The claims Al Gore made in his “Inconvenient Truth” film about there being more hurricanes were never true. In fact, an English court ruled that the “factual inaccuracies” (aka: blatant lies!) in the Al Gore documentary must be pointed out to the audience whenever the film is shown.

Many of the speakers brought up the fact that CO2 is only a little over 3% of the “greenhouse gases”, and that man contributes about 2% of that 3%. It is beyond statistically insignificant. No one is saying man isn’t contributing any CO2, but his contribution isn’t significant enough to change either temperature or climate.

Anthony Watts, a meteorologist, is the founder of the most-viewed climate website, “Watts Up With That” (http://wattsupwiththat.com). He is also a three-time winner of the Best Science Blog award. I found his website years ago. When he founded it, he posted a list of all the temperature stations across the country, and asked people living near them to go photograph them, and see if they comply with the regulations for their locations and upkeep. What he learned is that a majority of the stations are located in areas that affect the readings. They are in the middle of parking lots, near air- conditioning or heating units, over waste treatment plants, etc. Mr. Watts even tested the type of paint used on the stations, and found that it affected the temperature readings. His point is that if we can't trust the temperature readings to be accurate, why would we destroy our economy, and completely reorder our lives?

This graph was shown by several speakers. It shows all the climate change projections. None of them take into consideration the effects of sun or cloud cover. They all predict warming, but the actual data (in blue and green at the bottom of the graph), shows just how far off they are. They don’t even match the actual data from previous years!

There were so many interesting speakers! Astronaut Walt Cunningham and Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, expert in solar physics and solar terrestrial physics and head of space research at the Pulkovo Observatory in Russia, as well as head of the Selenometria Project on the International Space Station, spoke about how solar activity has the greatest influence of all on temperature and climate. Oddly enough, it isn’t included in any of the climate models.

Larry Bell is an endowed professor at the University of Houston, where he directs the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture. He has written nearly 300 articles for Forbes magazine, and the book “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power behind the Global Warming Hoax”.

There were dozens of experts in the fields of atmosphere, climate, and related sciences. The entire list of speakers is on the Heartland website, for those who want to learn more.

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of California gave a very entertaining talk on all the scary government claims of the last 30-some years, which have all been wrong. Yes, every last one. The government loves to scare us and spend billions of our tax dollars to combat some phantom threat. However, when said threat is inevitably proven false, we never get an apology or an explanation. So many people are left thinking the government actually solved something. I’ll bet some of you once believed hair spray caused holes in the ozone layer, didn’t you?

One of the highlights of the Conference was Lord Monckton, Lady Margaret Thatcher's science advisor. He is always entertaining. He goes to all the UN Earth Summit conferences, where he is one of the few voices of reason. The press never tells the public the contents of the agreements the UN always wants all the countries to sign. Lord Monckton does his best to inform us. He travels the world, trying to educate people about the consequences of these agreements. Several videos of his speeches have gone viral, and were in great measure responsible for our Congress not signing
UN agreements that would compromise our sovereignty. He showed us a recent video that had almost three million hits in two days, but the views mysteriously dropped off the day after that. He learned that someone paid over $250,000 to have searches for his name redirected to fake websites! The global warming alarmists can’t prove him wrong, so they keep trying to silence him.

Lord Monckton was kicked out of the Durban Summit, but he is not one to be deterred - he and Craig Rucker (http://www.cfact.org) parachuted in! Last year's climate summit proposed reducing CO2 by 100%. Yes, 100%! This would require all living things to stop exhaling. What a perfect example of how insane the alarmists are! It's worth noting that most regulations and penalties are levied against America, and not any other country. One of the agreements strove to invalidate all American patents. These things would be laughable, if they weren’t so deadly serious, and if our own representatives didn’t keep trying to sign these moronic agreements. Like Agenda 21, which Congress signed with nary a peep.

This is what Lord Monckton had to say: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/11/the-climate-consensus-is-not-97-its-100/

Many of the scientists and experts explained that temperatures haven’t risen in 17 years and 10 months. Even the IPCC, Phil Jones, and other climate alarmists have had to concede that fact. CO2 has been rising, but that is a good thing - it has made the earth more lush and green and created greater crop yields. One of the panels showed greenhouse plants injected with CO2 as compared to plants that didn't receive injections. The CO2 plants were about five times bigger, with bigger root systems and more leaves. CO2 is the life's blood of plants, just as oxygen is for man. CO2 is not, and never has been, a pollutant. It is a nutrient necessary for life. Reducing CO2 will lead to lower crop yields, and, eventually, widespread famine. The Jurassic period had 17 times more CO2 than we do now, and there was abundant plant life. More CO2 is better!

Not one prediction the climate alarmists have made has come true. Al Gore said we’d be flooded by the year 2000. That didn’t happen. He said polar bears were dying. There are more polar bears now than 30 years ago. They can swim for 60 miles, and live half their lives in the water. They are in no danger whatsoever. He said there would be more hurricanes and tornadoes, but there are fewer. He said the glaciers were melting, but they aren’t. He said CO2 increases cause temperature increases. Current data proves that false beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Temperature and climate are affected by solar activity, ocean currents, cloud cover, and several other factors (some of which I wasn’t previously aware of). Climate has been changing since the beginning of time, and will continue changing. Man may contribute CO2 to the atmosphere - all living things do - but that's a good and healthy thing!

The life’s blood of our economy is energy. Cheap, abundant energy is what made this country the richest, most successful country in the world, one with the highest standard of living, and the cleanest environment. Rich countries are always the cleanest. Shipping our industries to places with fewer environmental regulations doesn't affect the environment one iota, but it does destroy our economy by redistributing our jobs and wealth to other countries. Why are so many countries so poor? Because they don’t have access to cheap, abundant energy. This isn’t because they lack resources, it’s because they signed Earth Summit agreements that don’t allow them to use fossil fuels, and they can’t afford wind or solar power, which is ten times more expensive. The agreements force Western countries to pay for poor countries' outrageously expensive wind and solar energy.

The good news is that we are winning the debate. Five years ago, Global Warming was one of the top concerns of American citizens. Today, it isn’t even in the top 15! As the years pass, and all the dire predictions fall flat, people stop believing the lies. When the alarmists keep claiming if it’s hot, it’s global warming, If it’s snowing, it’s global warming, rain?, global warming, drought?, global warming, impotence, car accidents, post-nasal drip, and a thousand other things, it’s laughable. It's Chicken Little on steroids.

Do you wonder, if the actual data shows no significant warming, and human activity has little to no effect, and more CO2 is a good thing, why, then, do our president and the progressives keep pushing laws that restrict our consumption of energy? Why are they trying to force us our of our cars, and into smaller homes? If they got their way, what would our country be like? Would we still be free?

Thank God, this year is over. It wasn't 2013 for nothing. 

How's that Obamacare working for ya? The Liberal media is touting the BIG news that 1 million people have signed up for Obamacare.  One million. Woopee!  But didn't they tell us 30, 40, 50 million (depending on who's reporting) had no insurance? Sooo, why haven't 30, 40, 50 million signed up? If their lives were so devastated, so unmanageable, so deprived without insurance that the government had to take over the entire healthcare system to make sure these poor sad people  had insurance……why haven't they signed up? And yet 5 million people who had insurance have lost their insurance. Sooo, more people have lost their insurance under Obamacare than have signed up. That certainly is something to brag about. 

We have a President who was named for the "Biggest Lie of the Year". A recent Congressional hearing found Obama was acting as an Imperial President. He says if Congress won't act, he will. He already ignored the fact that Congress voted down both Cap and Trade and the Dream Act and implemented them though Executive Order.  The hearing concluded Obama was what the Constitution was designed to prevent, that he has committed at least ten impeachable offenses. Would he still be in office if he were an old, white Republican?

For the fifth year gas hovers around $4 a gallon and unemployment still high. Still no jobs and the few available are mostly part time.  Where is the media on this? Crickets. Energy prices going up as coal plants are closed. Keystone pipeline still not being built even though it has passed all environmental regulations. In a country with more natural resources than we can use, we are still dependent on foreign oil bought from countries that hate us. Enriching them so they can fight us. Does that sound like an intelligent plan to you?

Have you noticed what Obama has done to the military? Purging senior military commanders.  More than 200 senior commanders have been fired or forced to retire. Do you believe that many were incompetent? Two Generals and an Admiral were relieved of duty during the Benghazi attack. God is also being purged from the military. I can't think of people more in need of God than the military. Chaplains can't say Jesus Christ or God during military services. They can't have a Bible on their desks. They have to perform gay marriages even if they have a religious objection. No nativity scenes on bases.  But worse is the change in the rules of engagement. Our soldiers can't shoot unless shot at. Nor can they shoot at any building they think may contain civilians.  In the Middle East how do they tell who is a civilian and who isn't? The enemy knows this and takes full advantage of it. Why would we send our boys into combat if we didn't intend to WIN? The casualties under Obama doubled and I have no doubt it is because of these insane rules of engagement. 

Common Core is being implemented in our schools. They are data mining and dumbing down our children. Propaganda and political correctness is more important than facts and critical thinking. Classics being replaced by technical manuals. Kids being expelled or suspended for pointing their fingers and saying Bang, bang. Six year old being suspended for kissing a little girl's hand. In some states kids can't bring lunches from home even with a doctor's note. We need to sign a permission slip for our kids to go on a field trip but not to get birth control or abortions. This is standardized government curricula, something we have never wanted.

And now the feelings of transexuals (less than 1% of the population) are more important than the feelings of all the rest of the children. Our school bathrooms and locker rooms must be open to transexuals and they must be allowed to play sports with the sex they identify with. I can't see a problem with that, can you? 

The new year also beings the end of plastic bags and cheap light bulbs. Why are we allowing this nonsense? There is absolutely no reason to ban either. There is no global warming. We now have to pay $5 or more for one light bulb when we use to be able to buy 4 for a dollar. And plastic bags? Why? If you are talking about environmentally friendly, it takes seven truck loads of paper bags to replace one truck load of plastic bags. And are they banning the plastic bags for produce? No. Plastic bags are recyclable and reusable.  I can carry more plastic bags than paper bags and fit more in my car. I'm not going to carry around "reusable" virus infected bags although this is their goal. I'm mad about this every time I go to the grocery store. This is government overreach and social engineering. Don't pretend for a second there is a valid reason to ban either. 

With all the bad news there is a story that makes me very happy. There is a Russian ship stuck in ice at the antarctica. Attempts to free it have been unsuccessful. They are now sending a Chinese icebreaker with a helicopter to air lift the passengers and crew from the ship. Why does this make me happy? The ship is filled with environmentalists who were going to antarctica to verify global warming was melting the ice. LOL!  What will it take for these frauds to stop trying to convince us that we are causing global warming? I'm going to enjoy hearing how they spin this one. 

We have a big year ahead of us. It is an election year. We MUST take back the Senate and keep the House. We MUST. Obamacare just keeps getting worse and it will continue to. Winning should be easy but Boehner and Rove could grab defeat from the jaws of victory. We can't let that happen. Each and every one of us needs to commit to doing everything we can to win.