I still remember the “Spy vs Spy” cartoons in Mad Magazine when I was growing up.  One was dressed in white and the other in black, but otherwise they were identical. They were famous for playing dirty tricks on each other.

The impeachment trial is starting to look like a Spy vs Spy remake. Over the weekend, Democrats tried to pour gas on the impeachment fire with Lev Parnas. He has been spouting wild conspiracy nonsense on CNN and MSNBC and they have been lapping it up like a dog. The only thing certain is that anyone would be a fool to trust this guy. Before taking this too seriously, a lot of people knew about him last fall and even Adam Schiff wasn’t interested in interviewing him. When you fail to pass the smell test with Schiff, well, it doesn’t get any worse than that.

But Spy vs Spy taught us that two can play this game. Tomorrow, Sean Hannity is going to introduce a new book by Peter Schweizer. He is the one who wrote “Clinton Cash” about the Clinton Foundation. His new book is apparently over 1,000 pages and includes multiple sources. He allegedly details corruption by Joe Biden and a cast of thousands, including Harris, Warren, Sanders, Booker, Klobuchar, Garcetti and other Democrats. The usual suspects are trying, and failing, to stop this book from being released. It won’t work. Amazon is calling this the most anticipated non-fiction book ever. It has already hit #1 on Amazon, and it hasn’t even been released yet.

Normally the MSM would just ignore this book, as they did Clinton Cash. But, there’s the rub. You can’t go all ape over someone as pathetic as Lev Parnas and demand his narrative be included in the impeachment fiasco without opening the door for someone like Peter Schweizer.

I am taking his book, like other similar books with a huge grain of salt. As a rule of thumb, anything that seems too good (or bad, depending on your perspective) to be true, actually is unlikely to be true. The world is just never quite that neat.

This time the MSM cannot just ignore Peter Schweizer’s new book because their coverage of Lev Parnas made that impossible. This is the Senate, not the Schiff show, so one must consider what Parnas is saying, it will be impossible to avoid considering what Schweizer has to say. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter who is more credible, although Schweizer does appear to have documented sources. What matters is that it is beyond obvious that the things Biden and his son Hunter did are at least worth investigating. If, there was reasonable cause to investigate these two, the impeachment trial is OVER.

Democrats entire case is built on the assumption that this was to help Trump win re-election. But that assumes Trump was afraid of Joe Biden as an opponent and that seems unlikely. One could argue that Joe Biden would be the perfect foil for Donald Trump next fall.

It is increasingly like that Democrats, like the stars in Spy vs Spy, have ended up only ensnaring themselves. They can’t afford to call the witnesses that Chuck Schumer pretends to want without letting Trump call people too. Democrats had the total playing field to themselves during the House investigation. If they couldn’t get it done there, why would anyone think it would be different in the Senate? Logically, any “new” information is far more likely to hurt Democrats than Trump. In addition, Schiff is about to be challenged by people who are ready, willing and able to take him on. So far, he has shown zero capacity to handle that kind of pressure. He has already been caught telling numerous lies and make outrageous charges with zero supporting evidence.

Remember this. Democrats get 24 hours over two days to make their case. This is likely to be their high-water mark. After that, things can only go down hill and my prediction is that the speed at which their case is destroyed will stun the world.



President Trump has named the seven members of his legal team: Pat Cipillono, Jay Sekulow, Kenneth Starr, Alan Dershowitz, Robert Ray, Pam Bondi and Jane Raskin. So, in addition to his personal legal team, he has added two former independent counsels, one of the most dangerous constitutional attorneys in U.S. history, the former Attorney General of Florida and the woman who helped him deal with the Mueller investigation.

This begs the question: “How on earth can a list of such lightweight attorneys hope to compete with people the caliber of Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler?”



The leaders in Iran are learning something the hard way. As Abraham Lincoln said:

“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.”

A lot of the people in Iran, including State Media news anchors, suspected (knew) that the administration has been repeatedly lying to them for years. But the shoot down of that Ukrainian Airliner made it impossible to ignore this anymore. The problem is that the administration started out by denying that Iran had shot down that Ukrainian airliner. Then they got caught literally trying to bulldozer the evidence away. Finally, when the truth was too obvious to ignore, the administration admitted at least that yes, they had shot down that plane. It permanently exposed the administration as being untrustworthy.

Although the liberal media routinely accuses Trump of being a pathological liar, there is actually no evidence of that. The liberal left confuses gloating and exaggeration with lying. In reality every politician does some of this. The same people who accuse Trump of doing this routinely do the same thing themselves.

But now the Senate Trial is about to begin and there is a real potential that Democratic lies will be exposed in the worst possible way. This is guaranteed to be must-watch TV, at least during the first couple of days. For the first time, Republicans can and will fight back. This will be led by Jay Cipollono  and Jay Sekulow. Both are brilliant attorneys. None of the House Managers are remotely capable of competing with either of them. In addition, Democrats still have zero facts to back their accusations and in at least some cases, these are totally discredited.

One thing will soon become more than obvious. Either the people defending Trump are delusional and have been deliberately lying to us or the people attacking Trump are delusional and have been deliberately lying to us. There is no middle ground here. In addition, even if Trump’s accusers prove every single accusation, they still don’t have grounds for impeachment.

My prediction is that once this trial starts it is likely to be Democrats and liberal TV anchors desperately looking for an exit strategy. The most serious problem is that nothing Trump has done is even arguably a crime. Even if everything they said about him was true, it still wouldn’t be a crime.

We can be sure that a lot of people, like Joe diGenova and Rudy Giuliani were pushing Ukraine to investigate Biden. But there is an old saying, “just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean people are not really out to get you.Just because people were investigating Joe Biden, does not mean he is not guilty of corruption.

This case is, finally, going to trial and people are sick and tired of the nonsense. It is time to tee it up. Either Schiff has the facts and he can make the case or he doesn’t. When you try to remove a President of the United States from office, you need to have your “Schiff” together. Does anyone really think that is remotely possible? There is only one person less qualified than Adam Schiff to take on this assignment and that is Jerrold Nadler.

Democrats should be terrified. I believe they are terrified. That is why their supporters in the MSM are desperately trying to litigate this case in the media. It is why Schumer and Pelosi are pleading for additional witnesses. It is why Cipollono and Sekulow are not bothering to talk to the press, or anyone else. They are preparing for trial. So is John Roberts, and he will definitely play this by the book. There is little evidence either Schiff or Nadler have even read the book.

We are about to experience a world changing event. We better all pray that truth and justice prevail, because the alternative is unspeakable.



I am ambivalent about the Royal Family in the first place. The Netflix series about them is interesting, but this is obviously a very British thing. I often wonder why all the bother. One of the problems is that each generation seems to produce another “royal” who turns out to be a royal pain in the butt.

Previously it was the Duke of Windsor, who married an American divorcee, renounced the Crown and then cuddled up with Hitler. There is even a documentary about that called the “Nazi King.” Nice.

Then we had Princess Margaret who led a challenging personal life. She also made the Hollywood tour with very similar results. Even Prince Charles generated a lot of grief with his marriage to and divorce from Princess Diana. In fact, until very recently, he seemed to be the worst possible choice to replace Queen Elizabeth.

Well Bonnie Prince Charles has been redeemed, by the lethal combination of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. While they gladly live the life of royalty, funded by Prince Charles and taxpayers in the UK, they apparently feel somehow above it all. I guess this is what happens when you add in the obvious mental deficiencies from centuries of inbreeding with fresh delusional left wing progressive Hollywood elitism. They have elevated narcissism to a whole new level.

The result is actually fun to watch. Talk about a couple wanting to have it both ways, these clowns take the crown (pun intended). They desperately want the royal money, just none of the responsibilities that go with it. This, of course, is fueled by a MSM that glorifies people for being famous with little or no regard to accomplishment or even the hint of actual character. Sadly, they are likely to make more money, saying silly things to silly people for big bucks than they currently make for being a royal disaster. But at least we could do away with the “Your Royal Highness” crap. In addition, while royalty seems to last a life time, celebrity status does not.

There is also one thing about true royals. They are surrounded by pictures and memorials of dead people. More specifically dead Kings and Queens who also had the world at their feet, until a higher power pulled the plug. At some point, royalty turns out to be just as human as everyone else and they suffer the same fate.

Prince Charles, by the way, is starting to look good by comparison. He has threatened to cut Harry and Meghan off, just like he is cutting off other royal parasites. The result is that Britain will still have the Royal family, maybe, but at least there will be less of them. I am still stunned that Prince Charles has ended up being one of the more rational and reasonable members of the Royal family. If only someone explained the truth about the global warming myth so he can cut down on using precious jet fuel to attend celebrity endorsed climate change group hugs.

In most countries, royalty not only ends up on the street, in places like Russia and France they end up dead. At some point the UK will follow a similar path and the royal family would be wise to develop an exit strategy that avoids a similar fate. Queen Elizabeth clearly knows that. So does Prince Charles and Prince William. Prince Harry, not so much. I wonder, has anyone ever asked for DNA test to see if Prince Charles is even the dad? It is bad enough to be done in by a royal pain in the butt, but to be done in by a royal imposter would definitely be worse.



Everyone knew that President Trump ordered the drone attack that killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. We also know that Mike Lee and others were furious because they were not given the classified information that was used to make that decision. Mike Pence put this in perspective. He told Savannah Guthrie that they could not share with Congress some of the “most compelling” intelligence behind the administration’s decision to kill Soleimani because doing so “could compromise sources and methods.

Perhaps to put this in perspective, it is important to note that the same briefing given to the Senate was given to the House. That obviously included the “gang of eight.” These are the eight members of congress who are allowed access to classified information because of their superior position. The standard for people appointed to such positions is that they have the character to put the country above partisan politics. How else could anyone possibly trust them with access to such information?

The members of the gang of eight are:

United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence:  Adam Schiff, Devin Nunes

United States Select Committee on Intelligence: Richard Burr, Mark Warner

Leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives: Nancy Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy

Leadership in the United States Senate: Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer

The real problem is that Democrats have appointed people to position of power who simply cannot be trusted. Is there anyone in either party who really thinks Adam Schiff can be trusted? While one could argue that Pelosi and Schumer, although highly partisan, would protect classified information, few could say the same about Adam Schiff. He is notorious for leaking classified information and for deliberate lies and misrepresentation. Any President would be insane to trust him.

Hence the problem, if you can’t brief Adam Schiff, you can’t brief anyone. While Rand Paul and Mike Lee probably could be trusted, they are not the only ones in the room.

There is also something else. The speed at which the U.S. moved to find and take action against Soleimani is incredible. He knew he was a target and odds are his whereabouts was one of the most closely kept secrets in Iran. It would be naïve to assume that some great new facial recognition software made this possible. For one thing, it is unlikely that this could have been done in time to take any action. The intelligence that allowed the U.S. to take out Soleimani had to be very special. In addition, while CNN and MSNBC thought Iran had launched World War III, it is clear that the Trump administration knew better. The United States not only knew when to send all those airmen to bunkers, they knew, in advance, that this was not a serious threat.

In contrast, Iran was clearly terrified about the U.S. response, which is why they apparently shot down a civilian airliner by mistake. It would be foolish to underestimate the importance of the intelligence involved. I can’t imagine anything that would be more vital to protect. It is too bad that so many of our congressional representatives, on both sides of the aisle, are having trouble understanding this.



Many people remember one scene line from “A Few Good Men.” It was delivered by Jack Nicholson.

“You can’t handle the truth! …Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.”

In the movie, the hero is Lt. Daniel Kaffee (Tom Cruise) who succeeds in getting Col Nathan R. Jessep (Jack Nicholson) arrested. But in the real world, people relate a lot more to Col Jessep than they did Lt. Kaffee.

His quote rings equally true today. A lot of people can’t handle the truth. When we are truly threatened, we don’t want someone like Lt. Kaffee we want a Colonel Jessep. If someone is coming after you with a gun, you probably won’t call a priest, you will call the police. If you’re very lucky, they will get there in time.

The threat from Iran is beyond obvious. Even Mayor worthless from New York recognized the threat and took action. At some point, someone or something will have to change or Iran will definitely trigger a war. Some people never learn from history. France and the UK tried to appease Hitler. The result was beyond catastrophic. Incredibly many people still want to appease Iran, apparently obviously to the cost of confronting Iran after they have a nuclear weapon. This is not a new concept. In 2014 Ted Cruz warned about this by repeatedly saying: “If someone says they’re going to kill you, you should believe them.”

Trump has been confronting Iran with sanctions. He is now confronting them militarily. It would be better for everyone, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican if Iran believes him. The most dangerous thing anyone could do right now is to undermine Donald Trump. Yet, that is exactly what Nancy Pelosi and many other Democrats want to do. They want to pass legislation that will prevent Donald Trump from defending us. They want him to seek permission from Democrats in congress. That would be people like Pelosi,Omar, AOC and Adam Schiff. I do not think they will succeed. I am frankly embarrassed, as an American that they would even try.

When Iran launched those ballistic missiles into Iraq, the MSM immediately predicted that Trump would over-react and start another unnecessary war. Then, Trump didn’t even speak last night. Soon it became obvious that this attack didn’t actually cause much damage. In addition, Iran warned Iraq, knowing that Iraq would warn the U.S. Clearly it was Iran looking for a way to de-escalate. Trump did speak today, he looked strong and presidential. He looked in control and he looked like exactly the man you want on that wall.

Democrats went to sleep with visions of Iran attacking us and someone like Mayor Pete, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, or Bernie Sanders, not standing on that wall, but rather shivering in fear huddled down in an underground bunker trying to get approval from Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi to fight back. Sweet dreams.



The brush fires in Australia are really horrendous. Naturally, the climate change radicals are seizing the day. Finally proof that immediate action must be taken to STOP CLIMATE CHANGE. Of course nothing being proposed would have had any impact on these fires. The fires will not wait until everyone sells their car and starts riding bicycles again. When and if that happens, good luck with trying to fight these fires without using airplanes, trucks and other CO2 emitting monsters in the battle. This is beyond absurd, but that does not stop a whole lot of people from jumping on board the climate change bandwagon.

But, in their haste, they missed something big. I mean really big. It turns out that these fires aren’t the result of climate change; they are the result of arson. And not just one or two arsonists. There are reports that Australian police have arrested 183 people for lighting brush fires. Have you heard anyone in the MSM, including the people on Fox News mention this? No, instead they are trying to make a bad situation look worse. I saw one report that said ¼ of Australia was on fire. So I did some math. The latest report is that 14,000 square miles of land are on fire. That is, indeed, a very large area. But Australia is a very big place. As far as I can tell, there are 2.97 million square miles of land in Australia. So, while these fires are big, in order to cover ¼ of Australia the fire would have to be about 742,500 square miles. The reality is that these fires cover about 1/212 or .48% of Australia. This is about the equivalent of the amount of Native American blood in Elizabeth Warren.

I recently discovered that one can watch Australian News live on YouTube. So I watched some of the coverage from the people who are actually there. The situation is truly horrific, but not exactly the end of civilization as we know it. It has been hot in Australia, but this is not necessarily because of climate change. In 1938 New South Wales began a 37 day heatwave where the temperature was over 100F. There was even one week where the average was 116F with a peak of 119F. That heatwave broke a record that had been set in 1896.

So, when the Washington Post says Australia may see its hottest day ever recorded, take it with more than one grain of salt. We do get hotter temperatures in our cities now, in part because of all of the cement and asphalt. Anyone who stands on unshaded cement patio in Folsom during the summer knows that this gets really hot. But that does not mean the entire climate has changed. That is why real scientists pay very close attention to the location of thermometers. They probably learned this from my dad. He located the thermostat in our house on the same wall as the furnace chimney. That, of course, was the warmest wall in the house when the furnace was running. Then he would take my shivering mother over to look at that thermostat to prove it wasn’t actually that cold.

Much of the current problem appears to be more the result of human activity than global climate. That is particularly true when a whole lot of people are literally setting fires. In addition, we are all learning that more attention needs to be paid regarding where homes are located how we manage our forests.

This reminds me of an important personal principle. If CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times and the Washington Post all are warning you about imminent disaster, it is safe to go to bed without worry. The only thing certain is that these guys are NEVER right. There are enough things to worry about on this planet; the illusion of global warming can be safely dropped from the list.



One of the major differences between a strong manager and a weak manager is the ability to make decisions. No one is perfect and anyone who has been responsible for making big decisions has and will make mistakes. But, the most dangerous type of manager is one who cannot bring themselves to make a decision. Failure to make a decision is a decision, and almost always the worst decision.

None of us know the full impact of the decision by Trump to take out Soleimani. Right now a lot of people are lecturing Trump about the need to get advice from congress to avoid making a mistake. However, only a fool would ask a President of the United States to trust someone like Adam Schiff. The real tragedy is that Democrats put someone like Adam Schiff as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

In addition, history teaches us the painful lesson from failing to make decisions on a timely basis. If the allies in Europe had taken on Adolph Hitler a couple of years earlier, he would have been easy to defeat. Even after Hitler invaded Poland, and the Allies declared war on Germany, he was still vulnerable. France, at that time, had the largest Army in the world. But, the leaders of France and England could not decide what to do, so they did nothing. The result was that Hitler built up his military during the “phony war” and when he did strike, he quickly overwhelmed that enormous French army.

We will never know what would have happened if the allies had attacked Hitler at the start of World War II. We definitely know the horrific cost paid by everyone when that decision was made for them.

Similar things are easy to see in retrospect with regard to the attack on Pearl Harbor. U.S. Intelligence knew that Japanese spies were producing reports that basically mapped the ships in the harbor. That should have been a red flag warning, but it was ignored.

On the morning of December 7th, 1941, a U.S. radar station picked up the Japanese attack force at 7:02 a.m. The radar operators reported this to Lt. Kermit Tyler who was in charge of the Aircraft Warning Information Center. He told them to now worry about it. Shortly after 8:00 a.m., about one hour later, the Japanese air raid struck, catching the U.S. totally unprepared. We do not know how much could have been done within that one hour window, but it could hardly have been worse. What we do know is that the second wave, which began about 8:50 a.m. was far less successful than the first wave and the Japanese lost a lot more planes. The second wave was definitely met with a lot of Anti-aircraft fire and that was AFTER several major battleships had been destroyed. In addition, the smoke from the first attack made it much harder to see. We will never know how much difference it would have made if an air raid warning had been issued when those planes were first spotted. We do know the horrible price paid because that decision was not made.

At a time like this, we all need to unite behind our President and be grateful that he had the courage to make the decision. That does not mean there will be no further pain, in fact this decision will almost certainly result in significant cost. But the highest cost usually comes from people in a position to make critical decisions who are too paralyzed by fear to take decisive action.

I have personal experience with this. When the Rodney King verdict was announced in Los Angeles, the company I worked for had a major headquarters located in Watts. I immediately called that company President and strongly advised him to evacuate. Fortunately he quickly realized the threat and he took decisive action. Our people did manage to evacuate, but in some cases they were literally seconds from disaster. After I made that call, I called my own boss and told him what I had done. He became angry and said I should have asked for permission before making that call. I told him I would rather have him angry at me for what I did than for what I did not do. An hour later, after he had learned more about what happened, he called me and apologized.

We are due to pick the next person to be President of the United States in about 11 months. The most important qualification for a President is the ability to make difficult, if not impossible decisions during a time of crisis. President Trump passed that test, those seeking to replace him, not so much. The Democratic screech owls in congress are merely proving why we would be insane to trust any of them.



Chuck Todd is one of the most self-righteous and arrogant people on television. He is also ignorant and hopelessly naïve. Now he considers anyone who votes for Trump as believing in Fairy tales and he is particularly scornful of anyone who believes in Noah’s ark.

I have one simple question for Chuck Todd. “What is your explanation for the world you see around you?” If you tell me you believe in real science and evolution, you will merely be exposing your own ignorance. The story of Noah is not a scientific journal. But it is a better explanation for the world we see than the idiotic theories published in scientific journals.

There are, sadly, a lot of people who believe in things that are obviously not true. No theory explaining this world that relies only on randomness works. The following article unintentionally, points out the problem:


“Yet, many investigators are trying to identify even the slightest trace of natural selection using various statistical methods (). Using these methods, a number of authors have reported that a substantial proportion of amino acid substitutions are caused by positive Darwinian selection (). However, the statistical methods used are based on many assumptions, which are not necessarily satisfied with actual data.”

In other words, it is people like Chuck Todd, with challenged intellectual capacity, incapable of seeing the world around them who believe in fairy tales. Only your fairy tales are based on an irrational belief in a series of miraculous accidents occurring randomly over billions of years that somehow miraculously fall into a discernible pattern obvious to everyone who is paying attention. The one thing scientists agree on is that none of this is even mathematically possible.

Romans 1:22. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”



This is real. This is not made up. Nova Scotia is sinking. It has been sinking at a rate of about 15 centimeters per century. Steven Martin Saxby repeatedly warned that astronomical conditions would create exceptionally high tides on the upper reaches of the Bay of Fundy. Later, Tim Webster confirmed that yes, Nova Scotia is sinking. This is so alarming that CBC ran a story about it. At last, proof of global warming and climate change:



These articles just leave out one, very minor detail. Steven Martin Saxby was a brilliant British meteorologist; he just died in March of 1883. He wrote his reports about Nova Scotia in 1868 through 1869.  By the way, that storm which did hit in October of 1869 was named the “Saxby Gale” which was the original “perfect storm.”

So while the risk to Nova Scotia is real, it is not exactly new, and it is hard to blame a storm that occurred in 1869 on global warming. So, if there was no global warming, how did Saxby know a storm was coming? He predicted this based on the position of the sun and the moon on those dates. Some people still consider this to be a lucky guess, but the storm was very real.

So, yes, Nova Scotia is at risk of being under water, at least temporarily. But 15 cm (5.9 inches) per century means there is time to adjust. Actually Saxby recommended those adjustments by suggesting improvements of sea walls. That, by the way, is the same recommendation made by Tim Webster in 2009.

Many people are convinced that 99.999% of scientists agree that increasing CO2 levels are causing global warming. They believe this because the MSM reports this all the time. If you don’t believe in global warming you are stupid. It is indisputable. But, there are a couple of minor problems.

From 1940 to 1980, human production of CO2 increased the most. But, global temperatures actualy went down during this period. No one disputes this, they just ignore it.

The declining temperatures were well documented. In 1974 Times Magazine published an article called “Another Ice Age.” Here is a quote from that Time article:

“When meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe, they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.”

Newsweek published an article in 1975 called the “Cooling World.” This predicted a drastic decline in food production.

They were, fortunately, wrong. We now know that temperatures between 1980 and 1998 actually increased. This legitimate increase in temperature was the start of the global warming alarmist activity. But, real scientists know that global temperature actually stopped rising in 1998. This is well documented and contrary to scary articles in the Washington Post and the New York Times, undisputed. Even the IPCC admits this.  They just call it a brief pause, an aberration, but not long enough to be a trend. But even if the facts were ignored, something had to be done. You can’t keep warning about the consequences of global warming if the earth isn’t, well, warming.

So…they responded by changing their hypothesis from global warming to climate change. This is perfect, because climate is always guaranteed to change.

This is why so many people say “climate change” but then they always talk about global warming anyway. This would be mostly amusing if it didn’t do such tremendous harm to our environment and the world economy.

Sadly, far too many people really believe that increasing CO2 levels are causing global warming and are willing to take drastic action to fix the problem. They know this because people tell them this all the time. All of the DNC candidates are promising drastic action to fight climate change. The Governor of California blames the wild-fires on climate change. I have even seen people blame the homeless crisis on climate change. If you are not on board with cutting CO2 levels you are dangerously stupid.

Real scientists know that there is no scientific evidence to support the theory that rising CO2 levels causes an increase in global temperature. As far as I can tell, the best evidence of the relationship between CO2 levels and global temperature came from the study of a 420,000 year old ice core drilled down 3,623 meters in Antarctica during 1999. This is considered to be the best representation of temperature, CO2 and deuterium over a long period of time. (Deuterium is a stable isotopic form of water.)

The people who studied this core published an article in 2007:


“…our [East Antarctica, Dome C] ice core shows no indication that greenhouse gases have played a key role in such a coupling [with radiative forcing]”

Their findings were not disputed, just ignored.

These scientists believed that temperature increase preceded CO2 increase. A lot of people, including brilliant scientists with no training like Al Gore, assumed that the graph developed by this study proved that CO2 caused global warming. But the person who wrote that graph warned that it was easily to misread, because:

“It’s impossible to see a lag of centuries on a graph that covers a million years, so I have re-graphed the date from the original sources. “

In other words, a lot of this appears to come from people who didn’t know how to actually read a graph. Actually, Al Gore may have known how to read the graph, which is why he deliberately separated the CO2 graph from the global temperature graph. If he had combined the graphs, it would have been obvious, to at least some people, that CO2 levels lagged increasing temperatures.

The final summary of that report based on the ice core said the following:

The bottom line is that rising temperatures cause carbon levels to rise. Carbon may still influence temperatures, but these ice cores are neutral on that. If both factors caused each other to rise significantly, positive feedback would become exponential. We’d see a runaway greenhouse effect. It hasn’t happened. Some other factor is more important than carbon dioxide, or carbon’s role is minor.

Some will argue that the scientific report on that ice core is wrong. That is ok. History tells us that many scientific assumptions are wrong. It is theoretically possible that rising CO2 levels will, at some point, increase global temperatures. There is just no evidence of that yet. Some may wonder why the hysteria? The answer is that scientists have been making dire predictions on what would happen if CO2 levels increased and this did cause an increase in global temperature. So far, as best I can tell, none of their predictions have come true. In fact, none of them have come close to being true.

It is true that the waters in the Artic and other areas are warmer than in the past. But, there are also well known Oscillations in our oceans. The North Pacific Oscillation was discovered by Sir Gilbert Homs Walker. He was a physicist and statistician. He was not a meteorologist, but he was hired to use statistical analysis to predict monsoons in India. He is also known for describing the Southern Oscillation and other global climate phenomenon. Since he died in 1958, he did not rely on CO2 levels for his analysis of global climate. Even though he was not a meteorologist he was President of the Royal Meteorological Society from 1926 to 1927.

So, the next time someone tells you we are all going to die because of CO2 levels, be sure to do two things. One, smile, because they obviously have done zero real research. Two, don’t sell your coat.