At the Copenhagen summit for climate change, there is a rumor that they are going to declare Carbon Dioxide a deadly gas. Would you think they were stupid? After all CO2 (carbon dioxide) is something that we, as living beings exhale every minute. Then, thanks to the great creation that we live upon, plants take in this waste and spit out oxygen, which bonds with nitrogen and we breath it in.
If true, this is tyranny, and it could lead to a tax on breathing. Can you image having to pay a tax to breath in and out? Would you pay it? I wouldn't. Why should I pay for something that our planet gives us for free.
Rumor is that the globalists and power elite want to be the only people to live on Earth. Common sense has it, that if there are only 5000 people, and they are the power elite, who have never done honest work in their lives, what makes them think that they'll survive alone? I hate to tell them, but without farmers, ranchers, gardeners, they won't be able to grow their own food, or butcher their own food.
Why don't we take these morons and dump them on an island in the middle of the ocean and see how they'd survive without servants.
Rumor also has it, that our idiot of a president will surely sign this stupid treaty and doom us to the death of a thousand cuts.
Monday, December 07, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Would you buy a new house without first looking it over?
Would you buy a house without first walking through it, to make sure all of your furniture will fit? Of course not, then why should a representative or Senator vote on a Bill without first reading it? If our elected officials had any common sense, they wouldn't vote on any Bill set before them, before they'd had the time to read it. At the very least, they should vote "no" until they've actually read the bill.
Take, for instance, the Cap and Trade Bill, and the Health Care Bill in the house and Senate. These bills are 2000 pages each and they have been sprung on the representatives and Senators at the very last minute, no debate is allowed, and the idiots still vote before reading them. I'm guessing that it's the same for the Stimulus bills, and every other bill that runs through congress.
I think that Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid should take a step back and give the representatives and senators three weeks to read over the bills, then vote. Because as it stands, they are violating the law and forcing people to vote on things they haven't read. I am predicting that if they don't stop this, the American citizens will start a revolution and nobody will be able to stop it, until it's over.
Take, for instance, the Cap and Trade Bill, and the Health Care Bill in the house and Senate. These bills are 2000 pages each and they have been sprung on the representatives and Senators at the very last minute, no debate is allowed, and the idiots still vote before reading them. I'm guessing that it's the same for the Stimulus bills, and every other bill that runs through congress.
I think that Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid should take a step back and give the representatives and senators three weeks to read over the bills, then vote. Because as it stands, they are violating the law and forcing people to vote on things they haven't read. I am predicting that if they don't stop this, the American citizens will start a revolution and nobody will be able to stop it, until it's over.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Why Relgions should stay out of politics
Can we say, "Un-freakin-believable?" I'll reiterate what I've always said, "Churches should stay out of politics." Why would I say that? It could be because the Church's job isn't to influence policies, or to influence science, but in reality, it is because the Church is supposed to take care of people, without government help. Or maybe it's because of stupidity like this.
As usual, when religion and politics intermingle, people forget about science and about common sense. 350/million is stated as the upper limit of CO2 in the atmosphere. What would a church know about what happens when it goes above? As a scientist, I can tell you that in the billions of years that the Earth has been around, it has never gone above the 350/million. If anything, everytime CO2 has gone up, plants have flourished and O2 has been released to counteract the CO2.
It it true that we are supposed to be stewards of the world, but that doesn't mean that we need churches telling us what to do, or even governments. We should be working as individuals to fix our problems.
There have been rumors that Al Gore wants his brand of Enviro-nonsense to be recognized as a religion. For Real? Science that 1/2 of the scientists in the world now disagree with should be a religion? What's next, Church of Optimus Prime?
As usual, when religion and politics intermingle, people forget about science and about common sense. 350/million is stated as the upper limit of CO2 in the atmosphere. What would a church know about what happens when it goes above? As a scientist, I can tell you that in the billions of years that the Earth has been around, it has never gone above the 350/million. If anything, everytime CO2 has gone up, plants have flourished and O2 has been released to counteract the CO2.
It it true that we are supposed to be stewards of the world, but that doesn't mean that we need churches telling us what to do, or even governments. We should be working as individuals to fix our problems.
There have been rumors that Al Gore wants his brand of Enviro-nonsense to be recognized as a religion. For Real? Science that 1/2 of the scientists in the world now disagree with should be a religion? What's next, Church of Optimus Prime?
Hasan psychotic? Why was he promoted to Major?
If you haven't seen my other articles on Major Hasan, you can read them here and here. Today I was browsing the news sites, when I came across this one.
What caught my attention was the following paragraph.
What caught my attention was the following paragraph.
Hasan had been a trouble spot on officials' radar since he started training at Walter Reed, six years earlier. Several officials confirm that supervisors had repeatedly given him poor evaluations and warned him that he was doing substandard work.
Both fellow students and faculty were deeply troubled by Hasan's behavior — which they variously called disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent, and schizoid. The officials say he antagonized some students and faculty by espousing what they perceived to be extremist Islamic views. His supervisors at Walter Reed had even reprimanded him for telling at least one patient that "Islam can save your soul."
I've been working for a living since 1992, and I know from personal experience that on the times when my work was substandard, I was threatened with termination from my jobs. Why then, was Major Hasan not passed over for promotions, and why was he promoted to Major?
I think it could have been one of three reasons.
1) Islamophobia - I think that because he was a Muslim, he was given chance after chance after chance, and all because they didn't want to offend him, or have him go to CAIR and complain that he was terminated because of his religion.
2) Political Correctness - If it had been a Christian Psychologist that gave the "god can save your soul," speech, he or she would have been fired, but since Major Hasan was a religious minority, and he wasn't christian, nobody did anything about it, or did anything but complain.
3) Fear - They were afraid that if they released him, they'd have to answer questions about why they did it, and they just let it go.
To be perfectly honest, if he was all that they say he was, then why did they keep him in the army? Maybe if they had terminated his employment, 14 people would be alive now.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Those crazy lovable russians
Today seems to be a day for whacky news articles. This one, about the Russian's and weather modification made me chuckle.
I suppose if we wanted to attack Russia, we could do it on a day when the air force is doing weather service. (chuckles)
Their economy must be good, if they can afford a city budget of 60bil. But, with all that money, I wonder why they haven't thought about doming the city over. After all, if Houston is thinking about it, surely Moscow would be a good site for one too.
I suppose if we wanted to attack Russia, we could do it on a day when the air force is doing weather service. (chuckles)
Their economy must be good, if they can afford a city budget of 60bil. But, with all that money, I wonder why they haven't thought about doming the city over. After all, if Houston is thinking about it, surely Moscow would be a good site for one too.
Global Warming, for real?
After reading this article, Underwater Cabinet Meeting, I could only shake my head. Come on, do these people not know that we respire carbon dioxide and breath in oxygen?
I also keep wondering if nobody has read the new science reports that state, "Solar flares at a minimum, temperature drops, global warming a myth." Let's take these one at a time:
1) Our local star is the source of heat for our planet. We ride in the third orbital zone and when there are solar flares, it gets hot, and when there aren't it gets cool. Or more accurately, when there are a lot of sun spots, it gets hot, and when there aren't, it gets cold. It's called solar convection and our environment traps the heat under the clouds.
2) If you want to get rid of Carbon Dioxide, stop killing trees, or plant more trees. But then, if we planted more trees, we'd have a green house environment and maybe the ice caps would melt. The world used to be covered in forests as far as the eye could see, and that's why there was an abundance of life and water. When we started stripping the land of trees, we got hot temperatures, no water, and dust storms that blocked the sunlight and radiation from the ground.
Which would you rather have? Con artists getting rich selling so-called, "Carbon indulgences," or be able to keep your money for yourself?
Here's a few things heard on the news in just the last week or so.
1) Electricity companies urge congress to pass cap and trade bill.
Well, duh.....if the cap and trade goes through, they can buy carbon credits and still charge you an arm and a leg for electricity. They'll sell their own investors into slavery to make more profits. It's just greed, pure and simple.
2) Al Gore denies global cooling.
Well, this one may not have been on the radio, but it's true none the less, because he's still trying to hype the global warming myth, because it's his company that will sell the carbon credits and he looks to get very rich on the deal. Again, greed, pure and simple. You can bet he won't have to worry about it, nor does he.
3) NASA/Scientists report drop in temperature/ no change of temperature.
This is a given, considering that for the past ten years, the temperature has only gone up 1/10th of a degree. In that time, it's actually stayed pretty much the same. The only places that have reported increases are places where the gauges are within 50 feet of blacktop. You see, the tar and oil traps heat. So go figure...right?
4) California to outlaw plasma televisions.
Come on really? We'll outlaw modern technology because a 52 inch TV leads to global warming? What would you have us do, get rid of TV's, computers, heaters, air conditioners, ovens, stoves, microwaves, iceboxes, and go back to primitive technology? I am very doubtful that any device that's energy star rated actually contributes to global warming, but then global warming is a myth. If California makes plasma's illegal, then that will be a step toward tyranny. Why would you want to destroy california's economy? Could it be because the "terminator" is just a stupid moron that's actually a liberal?
Or could this be vast conspiracy to get people to move out of california so he can sell it to mexico? (Sarcasm, folks, I don't actually believe that he's capable to running such a fantastic conspiracy, after all, he is an actor, and rather bad one at that.)
So, what we are actually looking at is just another chance for the nanny state to take over and tell you what's best for you and your pocket book.
After all, global warming is just a myth.
I also keep wondering if nobody has read the new science reports that state, "Solar flares at a minimum, temperature drops, global warming a myth." Let's take these one at a time:
1) Our local star is the source of heat for our planet. We ride in the third orbital zone and when there are solar flares, it gets hot, and when there aren't it gets cool. Or more accurately, when there are a lot of sun spots, it gets hot, and when there aren't, it gets cold. It's called solar convection and our environment traps the heat under the clouds.
2) If you want to get rid of Carbon Dioxide, stop killing trees, or plant more trees. But then, if we planted more trees, we'd have a green house environment and maybe the ice caps would melt. The world used to be covered in forests as far as the eye could see, and that's why there was an abundance of life and water. When we started stripping the land of trees, we got hot temperatures, no water, and dust storms that blocked the sunlight and radiation from the ground.
Which would you rather have? Con artists getting rich selling so-called, "Carbon indulgences," or be able to keep your money for yourself?
Here's a few things heard on the news in just the last week or so.
1) Electricity companies urge congress to pass cap and trade bill.
Well, duh.....if the cap and trade goes through, they can buy carbon credits and still charge you an arm and a leg for electricity. They'll sell their own investors into slavery to make more profits. It's just greed, pure and simple.
2) Al Gore denies global cooling.
Well, this one may not have been on the radio, but it's true none the less, because he's still trying to hype the global warming myth, because it's his company that will sell the carbon credits and he looks to get very rich on the deal. Again, greed, pure and simple. You can bet he won't have to worry about it, nor does he.
3) NASA/Scientists report drop in temperature/ no change of temperature.
This is a given, considering that for the past ten years, the temperature has only gone up 1/10th of a degree. In that time, it's actually stayed pretty much the same. The only places that have reported increases are places where the gauges are within 50 feet of blacktop. You see, the tar and oil traps heat. So go figure...right?
4) California to outlaw plasma televisions.
Come on really? We'll outlaw modern technology because a 52 inch TV leads to global warming? What would you have us do, get rid of TV's, computers, heaters, air conditioners, ovens, stoves, microwaves, iceboxes, and go back to primitive technology? I am very doubtful that any device that's energy star rated actually contributes to global warming, but then global warming is a myth. If California makes plasma's illegal, then that will be a step toward tyranny. Why would you want to destroy california's economy? Could it be because the "terminator" is just a stupid moron that's actually a liberal?
Or could this be vast conspiracy to get people to move out of california so he can sell it to mexico? (Sarcasm, folks, I don't actually believe that he's capable to running such a fantastic conspiracy, after all, he is an actor, and rather bad one at that.)
So, what we are actually looking at is just another chance for the nanny state to take over and tell you what's best for you and your pocket book.
After all, global warming is just a myth.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Gays in the Military: Why do you have to flaunt your sexual behavior in public?
After reading this little blurb, I only have one question?
Why do gay people feel that they have to display their sexual behaviors in public?
I've always been a firm believer of "What goes on in the bedroom stays in the bedroom." If two guys want to stick their joysticks in places not designed for joysticks, then that's their business, but I do draw the line when it comes to public displays of affection.
A soft kiss on the hand, or quick smooch in public is okay, but guys, girls, and those who haven't decided which sex you are: I don't want to know about what goes on in your bedroom, nor do I want to see it in public.
Do I think gays should be able to serve in the armed forces, yes. Do I think it should go further than that? No. Because war is not about Sex on the battlefield, it's about fighting and winning. Do I care if the top general or admiral might be as gay as a three dollar bill? No, but I don't need to hear about his or her sexual exploits.
Do I think gays and lesbians should be able to get married? No, because Marriage is a sacred institution, given to us by the creator in order to procreate.
Do I think it's okay for two committed gay or lesbians to have a relationship? Sure, but don't call it marriage, call it a civil union, call it a gayraige, or something. Don't insult my spirituality or my religion by calling it what it isn't.
Should gay or lesbians be able to adopt? Sure, if two adults are in a committed relationship and feel they can help raise orphans, go for it. I don't care.
Personally, I think the federal government should be out of the marriage game altogether and leave it to we, the people, do decide what our relationships are. It's not up suits in DC to tell you that you can't cohabitate, or get a job, or visit your companion in the hospital, or collect your partners insurance policy after they die. Those things are legalities that we all deserve, regardless of sexual orientation, but you don't have to take it out of the bedroom.
So, in this case, maybe don't ask, don't tell, isn't such a bad thing. After all if you don't ask me about what goes on in my bedroom, I won't ask you what goes on in yours.
Why do gay people feel that they have to display their sexual behaviors in public?
I've always been a firm believer of "What goes on in the bedroom stays in the bedroom." If two guys want to stick their joysticks in places not designed for joysticks, then that's their business, but I do draw the line when it comes to public displays of affection.
A soft kiss on the hand, or quick smooch in public is okay, but guys, girls, and those who haven't decided which sex you are: I don't want to know about what goes on in your bedroom, nor do I want to see it in public.
Do I think gays should be able to serve in the armed forces, yes. Do I think it should go further than that? No. Because war is not about Sex on the battlefield, it's about fighting and winning. Do I care if the top general or admiral might be as gay as a three dollar bill? No, but I don't need to hear about his or her sexual exploits.
Do I think gays and lesbians should be able to get married? No, because Marriage is a sacred institution, given to us by the creator in order to procreate.
Do I think it's okay for two committed gay or lesbians to have a relationship? Sure, but don't call it marriage, call it a civil union, call it a gayraige, or something. Don't insult my spirituality or my religion by calling it what it isn't.
Should gay or lesbians be able to adopt? Sure, if two adults are in a committed relationship and feel they can help raise orphans, go for it. I don't care.
Personally, I think the federal government should be out of the marriage game altogether and leave it to we, the people, do decide what our relationships are. It's not up suits in DC to tell you that you can't cohabitate, or get a job, or visit your companion in the hospital, or collect your partners insurance policy after they die. Those things are legalities that we all deserve, regardless of sexual orientation, but you don't have to take it out of the bedroom.
So, in this case, maybe don't ask, don't tell, isn't such a bad thing. After all if you don't ask me about what goes on in my bedroom, I won't ask you what goes on in yours.
Friday, October 09, 2009
President Obama gets Nobel Peace Prize
When I heard this, I was understandably confused and angered. I mean, what the hell has President Obama done to deserve a peace prize? Nothing. Nothing at all.
Since becoming president, he has done the following:
It leads to an interesting question: What is the criteria for getting a Nobel Peace Prize? Is it selling out your country, or using your race to accuse everyone else to being racist, or maybe even running roughshod over the constitution?
Since becoming president, he has done the following:
- Gone on the Obama's apology tour
- passed the bailout package that sent us into depression
- passed the cash for clunkers program
- bought out banks
- appointed thieves and socialists and communists as czars
- told Israel to stop building on their own land
- has not taken a firm stance against russia, iran, or Venezuela
- has attempted to put the ex-president of honduras back in power
- has tried to pass the medical reform bill that nobody wants
- has used the race card twice and insulted the harvard police by calling them stupid.
- has had one beer summit
- Has called patriotic Americans terrorist and cowards
- has all but ignored the general on the ground in Afghanistan
- has tried to get the olympics and failed
- has fired one Inspector general for accusing his friend of fraud.
- has broken laws that he himself has signed.
- has buddied up to hugo chavez and fidel castro
- is engaged in destroying our way of life.
It leads to an interesting question: What is the criteria for getting a Nobel Peace Prize? Is it selling out your country, or using your race to accuse everyone else to being racist, or maybe even running roughshod over the constitution?
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Religious Leaders should stay out of politics
After two days of silence on health care, Obama re-engaged Wednesday, urging religious leaders to back his proposals and preparing for a pep talk to a much larger audience of liberal activists, whose enthusiasm has been questioned.
To which I say:
Religious leaders should stay out of this fight, because when you mix religion and politics, you always invariably tend to lose the message you want to send. The mandate of the church, as set forth by God and Christ, is to spread the good news of the ressurection of Christ, and the joy of his redeeming grace.
I don't recall a time when God said, "dabble in the politics of mortals.". So that means that God has never been interested in illegal immigration, political refugees, or even healthcare. The creator is, as always, is more interested in your immortal soul than he is your mortal body.
Anytime religious leaders forget their task, they end up going against the will of God and things like what happen in afghanistan and iraq happen, namely people killing for political reasons, but blaming it on God.
To which I say:
Religious leaders should stay out of this fight, because when you mix religion and politics, you always invariably tend to lose the message you want to send. The mandate of the church, as set forth by God and Christ, is to spread the good news of the ressurection of Christ, and the joy of his redeeming grace.
I don't recall a time when God said, "dabble in the politics of mortals.". So that means that God has never been interested in illegal immigration, political refugees, or even healthcare. The creator is, as always, is more interested in your immortal soul than he is your mortal body.
Anytime religious leaders forget their task, they end up going against the will of God and things like what happen in afghanistan and iraq happen, namely people killing for political reasons, but blaming it on God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)