Create a scare or panic, then profit from it before the sheep and under educated figure it out.
This fraud has both the climate scam and the leader of fake and biased news, the NY Times in it. When I had to work with New Yorker’s at IBM, they worshiped the Times both for what it said and how we treated it in the land of public relations. My co-worker Tom Belz would quote anti-Bush stuff as well as global warming panic from this bible. I’d laugh it off by telling him it was from the NYT and everyone knew they were lying. The anti-Bush (or anti-truth) rhetoric stopped with the revelation that he graduated both from Harvard and Yale. They couldn’t understand that one of their own wasn’t (then) part of the left cabal.
Then, I had to deal with the zealots like Greenmonk and Internet Trolls like Tim O’Reilly who were sure that then named global warming was the greatest problem in the world and that tides were rising.
A little history provides the facts I knew back then. It was all a lie. While the facts are now it place, I knew they couldn’t predict the weather next week, let alone decades from now.
Many of those beaches are along the East Coast. However, back in 1995, the New York Times ran a story with “experts” genuinely concerned those beaches would be gone in 25 years.
The article covered the assessment conducted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
According to draft sections of the new forecast, some of the predicted effects of climate change may now be emerging for the first time or with increasing clarity. The possible early effects include these:
*A continuing rise in average global sea level, which is likely to amount to more than a foot and a half by the year 2100. This, say the scientists, would inundate parts of many heavily populated river deltas and the cities on them, making them uninhabitable, and would destroy many beaches around the world. At the most likely rate of rise, some experts say, most of the beaches on the East Coast of the United States would be gone in 25 years. They are already disappearing at an average of 2 to 3 feet a year.
Yet, somehow, East Coast beaches remain. Sadly, marine mammals are routinely washing up along the coastal shores, and one of the concerns is that their deaths can be attributed to climate change “solutions.
(Plymouth Rock, the same tide level as 1620)
In addition to these dire predictions being entirely wrong, chasing after solutions to nonexistent problems is turning out to be expensive: Trillion dollars.
No one said that combating climate change would be cheap. Still, a report released during the COP27 climate talks made for a sobering reminder. The report, commissioned by Britain and Egypt as the past and current hosts of the UN summit, said that developing countries alone need a combined $1trn a year in external funding to meet the goals set out in their Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs (the climate action plan set out in the Paris Agreement).
This funding, in addition to the countries’ own expenditure, is needed for things like cutting emissions, dealing with deadly disasters and restoring nature. In one encouraging development, it was reported on November 11th that America and Japan would provide Indonesia with at least $15bn to help retire some coal-fired power stations early.
Time, talent, and treasure is squandered on bad policy built on “narrative science.”
Meanwhile, some recent studies shed light that on the Earth’s past that show the climate has long been in flux.
Researchers from Aarhus University, in collaboration with Stockholm University and the United States Geological Survey, recently published a report on their findings related to samples from the previously inaccessible region north of Greenland. Their findings indicated Arctic sea ice in this region melted away during summer months around 10,000 years ago.
The researchers have used data from the Early Holocene period to predict when the sea ice will melt today. During this time period, summer temperatures in the Arctic were higher than today. Although this was caused by natural climate variability opposed to the human-induced warming, it still is a natural laboratory for studying the fate of this region in the immediate future.
And while the authors argue their study confirms the need to be climate extremists, I assert that their data show man’s impact on the global climate isn’t panic-worthy. In fact, humanity would do better to focus efforts and resources on dealing with local pollution problems and perhaps exploring nuclear energy options.
The experience with Covid should have taught us not to trust global “experts” who offer simple solutions to complex issues. This should be doubly true with the “climate crisis,” especially as the long-term projections made nearly 30 years ago have proven to be wrong.
The good news: The East Coast beaches are still here. The bad news: So is the climate hysteria.
“Knowledge is a comfortable and necessary retreat and shelter for us in advanced age, and if we do not plant it while young, it will give us no shade when we grow old.”
And this
“Wear your learning, like your watch, in a private pocket. Do not pull it out merely to show that you have one. If asked what o’clock it is, tell it; but do not proclaim it hourly and unasked, like the watchman”
As you listen to this, it’s amazing how they talk in one voice, as if that makes it more right or actually correct. It’s as if they were coerced to say the narrative that they told about Covid and the Vaccine. It was this pattern recognition that tipped me off to the farce that was the jab.
You can read the body language of Bill Gates and tell that he is lying. The news reporters are just puppets reading whatever they are told to. The hags of The View try to shame people. You can see Evil speaking in Klaus Schwab (and Gates). I sounds like they are the Devil’s spawn as they talk.
It’s all too clear when they protested that people “don’t do your own research”. It’s what the Russians were told before communism, the Nazi’s were told before Hitler. They tried to shut people down from being safe. It was the only thing that kept some of us from making bad decisions. It’s how I learned what a farce the whole Covid story was.
There was enough group think going on here to know that they lied. Judge for yourself. YMMV
As I read about California trying to buy votes with reparations, it occurs to me that California can’t afford it nor were they in the slavery issue to begin with. It’s about being woke. No one mentions that the first slave owner in America was black, or that South America was by far a worse offender of slavery than the United States by millions of people. They let it go on longer and didn’t fight a civil war on behalf of stopping it.
It’s never mentioned that slavery still exists in North Africa today or that the people who sold the slaves were blacks to begin with.
A generation of Americans are being raised on half-truths and lies about the history of slavery in America.
They are given the impression that America was uniquely bad and that American slavery was uniquely bad. They learn nothing about slavery elsewhere. Among the many lies they are told are that “black slaves built America” and that America is systemically racist.
Since the only mortal enemy of the Left is truth, here are some truths about slavery.
America’s Slavery Compared to Slavery Elsewhere
If you are interested in morality and committed to truth, you do not ask, “Who had slaves?” You ask, “Who ended slavery?”
Who had slaves?
Every civilization throughout history had slaves: Asian societies, Africans, Native Americans, and other Indigenous peoples around the world, and the Muslim/Arab world, which may have had the most slaves of all.
Who ended slavery?
There was only one thing unique about slavery in the West: It raised the issue of the morality of slavery, ferociously debated it, and finally abolished it there, before it was abolished in any other civilization.
If you care about moral truth rather than, for example, promoting America-hatred, you must recognize—and you must teach—that America was one of the first slave-holding societies to abolish slavery. This even includes Africa.
Cornell professor Sandra Greene, a black scholar of African history, notes, “Slavery in the United States ended in 1865, but in West Africa it was not legally ended until 1875, and then it stretched on unofficially until almost World War I.”
The numbers of slaves.
According to the authoritative SlaveVoyages.org, the total number of black slaves imported from Africa into America was 305,326. The number of black slaves other countries imported from Africa into the rest of the New World—i.e., into the Caribbean and South America—was 12,521,337.
In other words, other countries imported 41 times the number of black slaves into the Western Hemisphere than the United States did, including the years before American independence).
Yet, the American Left never mentions this important moral point—because the Left-controlled education system suppresses facts it finds inconvenient, and the Left is not interested in morality or truth, but in vilifying America.
And then there is Arab/Muslim enslavement of blacks. Professor Paul Lovejoy, in his “Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa” (Cambridge University Press, 2012), reveals that from the beginning of Islam in the seventh century through the year 1600, the estimated number of Africans enslaved by Muslims was about 7 million. After 1600, it was about a million per year.
Do American students ever learn about the Arab/Muslim slave trade? How many know, for example, that a great percentage of the African male slaves were castrated so that they could not have families?
‘Black Slaves Built America’
This is another lie of the Left.
Those who make this argument point to the lucrative cotton manufacturing and trade in the 19th century—the industry in which black slaves were primarily used in the American South.
But University of Illinois professor of economics Deirdre McCloskey answered this:
Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk … That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production …
The United States and the United Kingdom and the rest would have become just as rich without the 250 years of unrequited toil. They have remained rich, observe, even after the peculiar institution was abolished, because their riches did not depend on its sinfulness.
But one need not know anything about cotton to understand how false “Black slaves built America” is. All you need is common sense.
First, even if slavery accounted for much of the wealth of the South, the Civil War that brought slavery to an end in the United States wiped out nearly all of that wealth and cost the Union billions (in today’s dollars).
Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported 4 million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America. Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically?
Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?
“Black slaves built America” is left-wing propaganda to vilify America and to discredit capitalism.
“America is systemically racist.”
This is the Great Left Lie.
Four million black people have emigrated to the United States since the 1960s—and tens of millions more would if they could. Are they all fools? Why would anyone move to a country that is systemically bigoted against them? Did any Jews emigrate to Germany in the 1930s?
Blacks have emigrated to the United States because they know what Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the black woman who fled her homeland of Somalia and who now writes and lectures in America, knows:
What the media do not tell you is that America is the best place on the planet to be black, female, gay, trans, or what have you.
Blacks emigrating to America know what Algerian writer Kamel Daoud, writing in Le Monde and Le Point, knows:
It is forbidden to say that the West is also the place to which we flee when we want to escape the injustice of our country of origin, dictatorship, war, hunger, or simply boredom. It is fashionable to say that the West is guilty of everything.
As regards American slavery and everything else, always remember this: Truth is a liberal value, and truth is a conservative value. It is not a left-wing value.
Footage shows Cameron Robbins, 18, who jumped off a cruise ship in the Bahamas as a dare on Wednesday 5/24/23. He has still not been found and the search has been suspended. pic.twitter.com/q8u1ic74H2
Maybe I should include the Bilderburg’s, because they are just a subset of this crowd. It’s been the same throughout history. Power hungry people trying to take over the world and tell the rest what to do.
As Alicia Powe previously reported – Key leadership from companies like Microsoft, ChatGPT, and Google are convening with prime ministers, royalty, bank governors, army generals, and top US officials at the 2023 Bilderberg Meeting in Lisbon, Portugal to strategize about global affairs.
At the end of the day, they want communism for everyone, with them in charge of the state. Things haven’t changed. There is your pattern. People are evil and want power, control and money. They’ll walk all over anyone who gets in their way, unless we stop them.
From Vlad Tepes.
WHO head, Tedros explains that the only answer to Covid and other health issues is communism. He doesn’t call it that. but that’s what it is.
WHO Director Tedros Calls for Global Pandemic Accord “The end of COVID-19 as a global health emergency is not just the end of a bad dream from which we have woken. We cannot simply carry on as we did before … Chief among those lessons is that we can only face shared threats with… pic.twitter.com/x3HLYI6ibh
Some corporations have been bowing to the religion of woke.
So far, Target has lost 8 billion for promoting pride children’s clothing, tuck (your dick) tranny bathing suits and their other Satan inspired stunts.
Just like the Ministry of Truth in 1984 or the Ministry of propaganda in Germany in the 1930’s, it’s a state sponsored department. They go after one politician for the things that others did.
Social media, where being fake about who you are for a hit on the like button, by people who probably don’t really like it. Adults acting like children and children learning to lie.
It goes from bad to worse. Here is a round up of Bud Light swirling down the Woke toilet. Excerpts from what is happening below, with links to more detail.
“None of these marketing folks has ever been to a NASCAR race, none has been to a football game or a rodeo,” Lachky noted. “That’s insanity. That’s marketing incompetence.”
Alissa Heinerscheid, Bud Light’s head of marketing, said in March that “I had a really clear job to do when I took over Bud Light. It was, this brand is in decline, it’s been in decline for a really long time, and if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no future for Bud Light.”
Bud Light sales dropped by about 28% in May when compared to sales figures from last year following controversy over the company’s partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. The Journal reported that the company recently informed wholesalers that it would buy back unsold cases of beer that have passed their expiration dates.
Anheuser-Busch Loses Highest LGBTQ+ Equality Rating – AB pissed off the people they were sucking up to, or you’ll never be able to make the Woke happy. Companies should just tell the trannies to pound sand.
The Human Rights Campaign, the country’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy group, has downgraded Anheuser-Busch’s equality score for the company’s handling of the backlash from a Bud Light promotion last month that featured transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney as a new spokesperson, USA Today reported on Monday.
A wave of conservative backlash harshly criticized the company for working with Mulvaney, with calls for a boycott appearing to be the reason for a drop in the sales of Bud Light, Business Insider reported.
HRC’s senior vice president of programs, research, and training Jay Brown said the group decided to revoke Anheuser-Busch’s equality score after several attempts over the last month to contact the company’s executive team went unanswered.
The group said it had asked the company to release a statement backing Mulvaney and transgender customers, shareholders, and employees.
Anheuser-Busch had previously held a perfect score and was designated a “Best Place to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality,” which meant the company took “concrete steps to establish and implement comprehensive policies, benefits, and practices that ensure greater equity for LGBTQ+ workers and their families,” according to HRC’s website.
“We don’t make this decision lightly,” Brown said. He emphasized that demonstrating backing for the LGBTQ+ community is particularly important in the current atmosphere, with numerous anti-LGBTQ bills under discussion in legislatures across the nation.
Bud Light angered its core customer base in April when it parented up with transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney and thus attempted to validate his claims of “womanhood.”
The business blunder has resulted in an organic boycott felt as far away as Australia, where Sky News host Rita Panahi cited the saga as a warning to her own country’s corporations.
Panahi theorized conservatives in her country could make their voices heard in ways that make those who attempt to propagate leftist causes pay for it if they only follow the great American roadmap.
In the case of Normal People v. Bud Light, Americans on the right have spoken loudly and clearly.
Conservatives have protested toxic so-called progressivism by choosing to remain peacefully committed to not giving hard-earned dollars to a company that mocks them.
From Don Surber: In the spirit of always leave them laughing, I quote the Toronto Sun, which reported, “Bud Light retailer offering $20 rebate on cases of beer being sold for $19.98.”
If it bleeds, it reads. That used to be the excuse for lying. Now, it’s just the ministry of propaganda, if anyone remembers the 30’s in Germany, or 1984 also.
The media has abandoned even the cover of pretending to be fair and unbiased. They just parrot the (deep) state talking points. They are in lockstep. Even Fox has gone state sponsored. Lachlan Murdoch and his liberal wife just pulled Foxweiser with the firing of Tucker Carlson. I lost trust in them around the 2016 election anyway, not that I trusted them to begin with.
Meathead, a relative of my asked why I didn’t watch the news to find out what happened. I said it’s because you’ll never find out by listening to the news.
Judge for yourself, but don’t be a sheep. They told people that if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor. If you liked your (insurance) plan, you could keep your plan. The Covid jab was safe and effective. January 6th was an insurrection.
Even an idiot could find a pattern here, excepting meathead.
It finally came out. AB is truly woke. Their main customer base for decades is men, the beer drinkers. I don’t know the white/black breakdown other than 13% of the population is black, so I’m guessing more white beer drinking men.
Anheuser-Busch, the parent company of Bud Light, has pledged to purge its white, male employees in an effort to have a “more diverse and inclusive environment,” according to footage found on the company’s website. The company has seen its sales collapse since the disastrous Dylan Mulvaney advertisement campaign which wiped billions off the firm’s value, and chased millions of customers away.
In the video, one employee of Anheuser-Busch explains, “we’re still 40 percent women, and 60 percent men, still predominantly white: so there’s still work to be done.” The “work” to be “done” is apparently replacing white male workers with alternatives.
In doing this, another employee says, “I feel like I finally found my voice as a black woman, and I’m not prepared to lose it.”
Discussing the #CheerstoDiversityAndInclusion campaign, Anheuser-Busch’s European Diversity and Inclusion Manager, Lara Laila Gärber explains, “at AB InBev, what we wanted to do is ensure that diversity and inclusion is fully integrated in our business strategy.”
WATCH:
Anheuser-Busch has lost billions of dollars as a result of its decision to embrace diversity by partnering with Dylan Mulvaney for the now infamous ad campaign. The stock has also since been downgraded by HSBC.
Back to me.
As a person sitting in the grandstands watching the shit show, I’d say they were cutting their own throats. Not everything is for everybody every time. Different people like different things. Why you don’t promote your customers instead of demeaning them for the sake of woke and pleasing Blackrock ESG for your proper CEI scoring (how woke you are for DEI, CRT, etc.).
Bud Light sales began dropping in the first week of April and kept falling for weeks. The boycott has hurt other Anheuser-Busch beers, too, including Budweiser, Michelob Ultra and Busch Light. Sales volumes for rivals Coors Light and Miller Lite in the first week of May were up about 16% and 17%, respectively, according to Bump Williams.
Sure, it’s easy to say go woke, go broke, but this would be in textbooks in colossal marketing mistakes, except the colleges are just as woke. They’ll provide cover for this unless someone wants to actually teach success.
No spin in the world is going to be able to hide the sales numbers. They thought it would blow over, but they underestimated how sick the normal person in America is getting from having this woke crap shoved down our throats by the coastal elites.
Keep hiring those Harvard grads to lower your sales even more. I’d be hiring a bunch of male toxicity employees who actually understood the product and the customer. I bet Don Draper would do better in his sleep than this.
Bias is bias, discrimination is discrimination. Disparaging someone for the color of their skin, any color is racist. It’s sexist to judge against another sex. Funny how they promote dozens of genders, but discriminate against males. They are doing what they blame others for, the heights of hypocrisy.
I wonder if the major corporations realized how out of touch they were when they started this nonsense. It seems that DEI, CRT and the rest of the alphabet wokeness isn’t selling any products. It’s part of the self destruction, like the Portland post below that shows most of regular people are tired of this woke crap.
The companies that were trying to get ESG points from Blackrock are paying a high price for their actions.
The rest of us just want some sanity and to get back to normal life. Those of us who are fed up just stopped buying the products from these weirdo’s. Don’t force that on us to make yourselves feel better.
Just two months ago, transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney was flying high with endorsements from Bud Light, Nike and Maybelline, to name a few. Hot off her “365 Days of Girlhood” journey on social media, she was also enjoying an elaborate musical event staged at the Rainbow Room in her honor.
That was then. But now, after the backlash against Bud Light’s decision to partner with Mulvaney on social media and feature her face on beer cans, other trans influencers say they’re feeling the heat as well.
Some told The Post that, at a time when they are usually in high demand — the period leading up to Pride Month in June — brand partnership offers are drying up.
Rose Montoya, who has 1 million followers on TikTok and Instagram, said she’s noticed a big drop-off in the number of deals she’s been offered.
Prior to Pride Month last year, Montoya — a Seattle University graduate who bills herself as a content creator, trans advocate, model and actress — was getting up to 100 brand partnerships thrown her way. Now, she said, it’s been reduced to a trickle of maybe 12 or so offers.
Trans influencer Rose Montoya says many of her usual brand partnership offers have dried up in the wake of the Dylan Mulvaney Bud Light fiasco.
“Last year was my best yet,” Montoya, 27, told The Post. “I had everything — skincare brands, TV networks, advocacy groups, lots of start-ups. They all reached out. Now I’m not hearing from them.”
While she noted that “the market has also become over-saturated with influencers since 2000,” Montoya added that “the average queer creative makes all their money in June —enough to live on for the rest of the year. And the fact that there’s been a chill probably isn’t helped by the whole Bud Light thing.”
Montoya said that she can get up to $15,000 for a brand partnership. Some of her contracts are for six months at a time, and she hopes to renew one of those soon.
I had a relative move there in the early 2010’s. The theme was keep Portland weird (look out Austin who has adopted that phrase) and I knew it was going down the toilet right then. I saw the beginnings of anarchy, homeless people defecating on the street and mentally unstable people yelling at us as we walked to the foodie places. Everything was so hip, but the crumbling of the infrastructure was there at night in the tent cities. They thought they were the elite and upper crust because they were against what was morally right.
Drugs were made legal and the flush began to swirl faster.
Ted Wheeler, the mayor who let it self destruct did nothing to save it. He embraced everything liberal and now you see what is happening.
Little did I know how far down the sewer it would go. After occupy, antifa, homelessness, drugs, crime, shoplifting and control by the left who wouldn’t uphold the law, it is a shithole like San Fransisco now.
They want to refund the police, but it’s too far gone. The city is so indoctrinated in what they feel it should be rather than right vs wrong that it would take burning it down and starting over.
Half of the state has voted to join Idaho. Even they want to get away from Portland.
Back in 2020 when Democratic-run cities decided it would be a good idea to give in to angry mobs of protestors and defund local police and other authoritative agencies, no city’s voice seemed louder than that of Portland. The city’s leaders cut police funding by $15 million leaving the city largely in the hands of the angry, violent mobs that had forced the move.
Now, 3 years later with the city sinking under skyrocketing crime rates, a shrinking tax base, and shuttered businesses, Portland seems to have finally realized that it needs police, but replacing the force it all but threw away is proving to be an uphill battle. The city is struggling to attract new officers, DAs, and investigators given its leaders’ recent history of turning their backs on law enforcement. Potential replacements know better than to go where they’re not wanted.
The lack of candidates for its underfunded and under-appreciated police force and court system is making it difficult for a newly launched task force to fulfill its purpose and crack down on retail and vehicle theft in what now appears to be a lawless city.
Crime rates have risen so drastically since 2020, that Portland residents are now 3 times more likely to be the victim of a property crime than the average U.S. citizen, according to data from Neighborhood Scout. Portland had 63,000 property thefts in 2022 along with roughly 11,000 stolen vehicles – a new record for the city that doesn’t need police.
Now, residents who have the means to do so are fleeing the city and taking their businesses with them. Public data has shown that since the pandemic, more than 2,600 businesses left downtown Portland and filed for changes of address with USPS.
Not only has the city been left trying to replace the $15 million it cut from its budget for police and the officers themselves, but now Portland is having to find a way to reinstate its police force with limited funding as its tax base continues to shrink as more residents pack up and leave.
Meanwhile, according to a report by Zerohedge, most of the remaining local police officers have been doing everything they can to get off the force. Officers have not only been quitting at an alarmingly fast pace but there has also been a substantial uptick in early retirements and transfer requests to other municipalities.
To complicate matters further, the police who have survived the past 3 years have become discouraged by liberal prosecutors who never take cases to court, instead opting to return criminals to the streets.
Meanwhile, it is unlikely that defunding the police, which was done wholeheartedly and briskly, can be undone as quickly and thoroughly. It is far easier to cut $15 million than it is to raise it – a lesson the Portland City Council and the city’s residents have had to learn the hard way.
It’s a tough time to be a Portland resident, but a great time to be a criminal. As for the city’s police force, it will take years, possibly decades, to rebuild what the City Council destroyed in a matter of months.
For all the carping they do about being discriminated against, how come they haven’t hit the roof on all the erasing women lately? As I point out through the evidence below, feminists don’t care about women. They care about promoting themselves and/or getting money. They’ll wear pink pussy caps if they can hate someone like a politician, but won’t fight for the actual cause.
They are quiet while companies erase them or push them aside for men, pretending to be women. I don’t care what they want to be called, they still need a prostate exam and will never have ovaries or Fallopian tubes. They are straight men.
Next and possibly one of the worst is the latest SI swimsuit cover. There is a man who took thousands if not hundreds of thousands from actual females when they put him on the cover. The link will take you to him in a woman’s bathing suit. I don’t want to have to look at it. The Swimsuit edition used to be about gorgeous females. It provided teenagers with endless one handed page turning.
Petras emerged on the the scene back in 2017 when she released her first song, “I Don’t Want It at All.” The 30-year-old has continued to make music since then.
Let’s not forget about Bud Light and Miller Lite. I’m not even going to link to them they are so everywhere.
You’d think that Feminists cared about all females, but they don’t. If you are outside of the United States or are not a liberal, you don’t count.
For example, where are they are on how women are treated under Islam? Not a peep from the talking heads looking for social media followers. The truth is they don’t really care unless it helps them.
The stories we bring to you this month focus on the status of women who live under Islamic Law (sharia). The Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan are among the world’s regimes under which some of the most horrific human rights abuses against women occur. Islamic Law consigns women to a second-class status under which the rights of men are accorded a superior status. Such unequal treatment derives from the Qur’an, which allows Muslim males to marry up to four women in addition to those “that your right hands possess” (i.e., sex slaves, Q 4:3) and to grant male children inheritance “equal to that of two females” (Q 4:11). In Surah 4:34, the Qur’an tells Muslim men that if they “fear disloyalty and ill conduct” from their wives, they should admonish them, refuse to share their beds, and “beat them”. Muslim men are told in Q: 2:223 that “Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how you will” (no such thing as marital rape under sharia). [Editor’s Note — ‘tilth’ is cultivated land ready to seed.]
Regarding the requirement that women must cover their hair and wear concealing clothing, this derives directly from Surahs 28:31 and 33:59, which connect covering up with not being “molested” (i.e., raped, by Muslim men). In this spirit, the IRI is cracking down on women and girls who have been in the forefront of the uprising against the Tehran regime since the September 2022 murder by the so-called “morality police” of the young Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, for supposedly allowing some hair to show under her hijab.
Just to prove they don’t care, a man with full dick and balls is masquerading as a sorority sister and getting a boner while ogling the girls. He’s not trans. He’s an Animal House or Revenge of the Nerds pervert who is scamming the system to ogle girls because he is a loser who couldn’t get one the real way.
The lawsuit also alleges that ‘Mr. Smith has, while watching members enter the sorority house, had an erection visible through his leggings.’
‘It’s a weird gut wrenching feeling that every time I leave my room I’ll walk past him in the hall in whatever setting that may be.’
Seven members of the University of Wyoming Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority are suing after the chapter admitted a 21-year-old biological male who identifies as female.
The lawsuit notes that the individual, who goes by the name Artemis Langford (referred to in the lawsuit as Terry Smith), is 6’2” and 260 pounds, often sits in the women’s common area on the second floor and watches them for several hours without saying a word.
The group of women filed the complaint against Langford himself, as well as Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity base in Ohio, the organization president, and Kappa Kappa Gamma Building Co. in Wyoming.
Langford does not live at the house but often visits it and watches the women, according to the suit. However, he is currently set to move into the house in September.
The complaint details an incident in which “One sorority member walked down the hall to take a shower, wearing only a towel,” and “She felt an unsettling presence, turned, and saw Mr. Smith watching her silently.”
The lawsuit also alleges that “Mr. Smith has, while watching members enter the sorority house, had an erection visible through his leggings.” Langford reportedly makes no attempts to appear feminine but simply identifies using “she/her” pronouns.
On May 15, the women made an appearance on the Megyn Kelly show to talk about the issue. One of the women, named Jaylyn, said that “It’s a weird, gut-wrenching feeling that every time I leave my room, I’ll walk past him in the hall in whatever setting that may be. And it’s never a pleasant encounter and that’s the scary part. This just goes to show that we need women’s spaces for that reason. Our house is our home.”
The women also said that several members have already left the sorority.
Langford’s personal Instagram page features only five posts—four of which are photos of women’s feet. Some of the accompanying captions read: “This young girl has perfect feet” and “I’ve always had a mild foot fetish.”
Campus Reformreported in October when Langford was first admitted to the sorority—making it the first at the university to induct a transgender person.
Campus Reform made its best attempts to contact the relevant parties for comment. This article will be updated accordingly.
They are trying to get gene therapy into everything. I doesn’t take a genius (maybe it does) to see that mRNA isn’t advanced far enough along to function without doing harm. Of course, that could be the actual reason some are doing it.
Like AI, mRNA could be used for good, but it is a tool. People are good and evil. It is the evil that are winning on both topics so far. It’s being used for no good. Just look at the sudden deaths count, especially on young men who got the Covid jab.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced on Monday that enrollment for volunteers has begun for a Phase I clinical trial testing of universal flu vaccine based on mRNA technology.
Messenger RNA, or mRNA, is the same technology behind the widely used Covid shot from Moderna and Pfizer.
“A clinical trial of an experimental universal influenza vaccine developed by researchers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ (NIAID) Vaccine Research Center (VRC), part of the National Institutes of Health, has begun enrolling volunteers at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina,” according to the news release.
“This Phase 1 trial will test the experimental vaccine, known as H1ssF-3928 mRNA-LNP, for safety and its ability to induce an immune response.”
Researchers are hoping that this vaccine would provide long-lasting protection against many flu strains, eliminating the need for annual vaccinations.
The clinical trial is open to 50 healthy participants ages 18 to 49.
“Three groups of study participants (10 participants each) will be vaccinated with 10, 25 and 50 micrograms of the experimental vaccine, respectively. After evaluation of the data to determine an optimum dosage, an additional 10 participants will be enrolled to receive the optimum dosage. The study also will include a group of participants who will receive a current quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine.”
According to CDC, a quadrivalent influenza (flu) vaccine is designed to protect against four different flu viruses, including two influenza A viruses and two influenza B viruses.
“A universal influenza vaccine would be a major public health achievement and could eliminate the need for both annual development of seasonal influenza vaccines, as well as the need for patients to get a flu shot each year,” said Acting NIAID Director Hugh Auchincloss, M.D. “Moreover, some strains of influenza virus have significant pandemic potential. A universal flu vaccine could serve as an important line of defense against the spread of a future flu pandemic.”
There is more at the link above, but they said the Covid-19 jab was safe and effective, while hiding the test results and getting legal immunity from the murder of more people than Covid itself.
So unless I can’t help it, no mRNA anything for me. Decide for yourself if you want to have something changing your DNA (what messenger RNA can do) and wondering if it is going to kill you.
It’s a time suck for some, it causes mental illness in teenage girls and is a propaganda tool now.
It’s being weaponized against the users and they don’t know it.
While I think that it has crossed the Maginot line of some not being able to shut it off, it is being used as a weapon against us now. It probably has for a long time. It was a political football that was kicked around when they started banning people for not thinking the same way the Silicon Valley tech moguls think.
Before the meat of this story, let’s not forget that Tik Tok is also a Chinese spy tool.
The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) cyber-influence campaigns against Western democracies on social media have become more frequent, sophisticated, and effective in recent years, with more Chinese government agencies, such as Qi An Xin, becoming involved.
Named “Gaming Public Opinion,” the report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) included data collection spanning Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Sina Weibo, and ByteDance products.
It reveals previously unreported CCP cyber-influence operations, such as one called the “Spamouflage network,” in which inauthentic accounts are used to spread claims that the United States is irresponsibly conducting cyber-espionage operations against China and other countries.
“The CCP has used these cyber-enabled influence operations to seek to interfere in U.S. politics, Australian politics, and national security decisions, undermine the Quad and Japanese defence policies, and impose costs on Australian and North American rare-earth mining companies,” the report said.
A Spamouflage account called Erin Chew claimed to live in Sydney. (screenshot/ASPI report)
The most notable Chinese party-state agencies involved include the People’s Liberation Army’s Strategic Support Force, which conducts cyber operations as part of the army’s political warfare; the Ministry of State Security, which conducts covert operations for state security; the Central Propaganda Department, which oversees China’s domestic and foreign propaganda efforts; the Ministry of Public Security (MPS), which enforces China’s internet laws; and the Cyberspace Administration of China, which regulates China’s internet ecosystem.
Chinese state media outlets and Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials are also running clandestine operations that seek to amplify their own overt propaganda and influence activities.
The account of user 7763546981 has a headshot of a public security bureau. (screenshot/ASPI report)
Private Chinese Companies Assisting Government Agencies
In addition, the authors found that private Chinese companies collaborate with CCP agencies in their operations.
In a recent coordinated CCP propaganda campaign named “Operation Honey Badger” (蜜獾行动) by Chinese government-linked entities, for instance, Chinese cybersecurity company Qi An Xin (奇安信) supporting the influence operation.
“We uncover new evidence to suggest that the MPS, with the support of cybersecurity company Qi An Xin, may be involved in this campaign,” they wrote.
“The company has the capacity to seed disinformation about advanced persistent threats to its clients in Southeast Asia and other countries… It’s deeply connected with Chinese intelligence, military, and security services and plays an important role in China’s cybersecurity and state security strategies.”
As of April 2023, the “Operation Honey Badger” campaign continues to attribute cyber-espionage operations to the U.S. government.
Evidence that Chinese officials and state media retweeted tweets from Spamouflage accounts. (screenshot/ASPI report)
Clive Hamilton, the Australian academic who authored “Silent Invasion,” said he agrees with the arguments made in the ASPI report.
Hamilton said he believes the CCP’s goal of manipulating public opinion remains the same, but the way it actually does it is changing.
As countries such as Australia have strengthened legislation and law enforcement to counter foreign interference, it has become more difficult for Beijing to carry out on-the-ground missions in those countries. That’s why underground work through networks is all the more important, he told Radio Free Asia.
Clive Hamilton, author of “Silent Invasion,” speaks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in “A Conversation on Chinese Influence in Australia and Beyond” in Washington on Oct. 18, 2018. (Wu Wei/Epoch Times)
Solution: Strengthen legislation, intelligence sharing, and cooperate with social media
The authors suggest governments review foreign interference legislation and consider mandating that social media platforms disclose state-backed influence operations and other transparency reporting to increase the public’s threat awareness.
In addition, they appeal to partners and allies to share more intelligence with one another on such influence operations.
“Strong open-source intelligence skills and collection capabilities are a crucial part of investigating and attributing these operations, the low classification of which should making intelligence sharing easier,” they argued.
On the other hand, social media platforms are urged to remove access to those analytics for suspicious accounts breaching platform policies, making it difficult for identified malicious actors to measure the effectiveness of influence operations.
The bill’s summary claims it would end “school lunch shaming” and “provides an additional incentive for local food procurement.”
But the 47-page bill doesn’t explain how the government would pay for the program. How much does the program cost? How will the government offset the payments?
Oh, wait. These people think money grows on trees.
The 44th first lady (hard to type those words about an America hater) tried this as her signature program. It was a failure as the kids hated the meals so much that they wouldn’t eat the swill. A lot of “food” got thrown away. $500 million down the drain and it ended silently and thankfully.
Yet here we go again. Trying to force their opinions on others for conformity.
I had a friend who ate an oatmeal creme cookie and a lemonade from the snack machine. His dad was a university professor so they weren’t poor. He was saving up his money. He bought a Porsche before anyone in the class of 1100 that we graduated in.
I ate PB&J and loved it. The school meals were ok, but almost no one wanted or could eat them.
Ian Clifford, an IT guy for IBM, has been out sick since 2008 and is still collecting a paycheck.
Apparently back in the day, IBM’s British arm offered the mother-load of job perks.
Under Clifford’s health plan, if an employee becomes disabled for any reason while working for the company, the employee cannot be dismissed but cannot be forced to work either. Instead they will continue to receive their paycheck until recovery, retirement, or death if earlier, to be paid at 75% of agreed earnings
Clifford was hired at £72,037 ($90,221) per year, so since becoming disabled, he’s been making £54028 ($67,667) per year. Clifford will receive this salary for 30 years for a grand total of £1.5 million ($1.88 million): not a bad haul for doing nothing.
The writeup itself is a bunch of liberal racist gobbledygook, filled with virtue signaling, misrepresentations, and blindness to the meaning of the findings.
Glorious. Truly glorious. Levels of stupidity that only academics can achieve. I am pretty sure it was put together by the Yale PR department rather than the researchers, who seem a bit more sober than the PR people.
The study to which I refer is not new. It is new to me, though, so I feel utterly free to share my thoughts because the study confirms what anybody who has spent time around condescending liberals instinctively knows.
The Yale writeup of the study is a perfect example of how clueless liberals are, and how blind to reason academics are so often.
Just reupping this Yale study from a few years back that demonstrated that white liberals literally use smaller words when talking to nonwhite people, while conservatives do not. https://t.co/1BNqBGzVP8
New research suggests that bias may also shape daily interactions between racial minorities and white people, even those whites who tend to be less biased.
According to new research by Cydney Dupree, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Yale SOM, white liberals tend to downplay their own verbal competence in exchanges with racial minorities, compared to how other white Americans act in such exchanges. The study is scheduled for publication in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Notice how the discussion begins? They claim to be studying Whites who are LESS BIASED. The assumption is that White liberals are not biased against Black people, while their research shows exactly the opposite as we shall see. The researchers are liberal, know that liberals are good, and therefore liberals are not the biased ones. Conservatives, who behave the same with both Whites and minorities, are the genuinely biased ones.
Liberal=good. It is a law of nature.
So how do liberals behave, these truly good and unbiased people?
The team found that The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, though “it was harder to find speeches from Republicans delivered to minority audiences,” Dupree notes. There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”
In other words, Democrats talk down to Black and Hispanic people, while Republicans do not.
Republicans treat their audiences of whatever race the same, and with the same basic respect for their intelligence and ability to reason.
Hmmm. Who is “less biased?”
What about in work settings? Perhaps liberal politicians treat minorities as if they were children, but the average liberal treats their Black colleagues just the same as their White colleagues?
Nope, they too assume that Blacks are stupid.
The researchers found that No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”
Hmm. Patronizing? Why would anybody assume that treating people as if they are stupid and incompetent is patronizing?
Dupree and Fiske suspect that the behavior stems from a liberal person’s desire to connect with other races. One possible reason for the “competence downshift,” as the authors describe it, is that, regardless of race, people tend to downplay their competence when they want to appear likeable and friendly. But it’s also possible that “this is happening because people are using common stereotypes in an effort to get along,” Dupree says.
Initial data from follow-up studies suggest that describing a black person as highly intelligent, thus reversing the stereotype, or as already highly motivated to get along with whites, thus removing the need to prove goodwill, can reduce the likelihood that a white person will downplay their competence in their interactions with the black person.
Do you see what they are doing here? Liberals treat minorities as if they are clumsy children because they want to be liked. They are just super nice people, that’s all.
Conservatives, those meanies, treat everybody the same, proving that they hate minorities and are a bunch of White supremacists. If they were truly good people they would treat Black people like children, as liberals do. Or something.
Despite all the evidence that White liberals are racist–they assume that Blacks cannot understand complicated things and that Blacks are incompetent–the researchers actually characterize the White liberals as “allies” to minorities.
Some allies.
While many previous studies have examined how people who hold racial bias behave in multi-racial settings, few have studied how whites who are more well-intentioned interact with people of other races. “There’s less work that explores how well-intentioned whites try to get along with racial minorities,” Dupree says. “We wanted to know their strategies for increasing connections between members of different social groups—and how effective these strategies are.”
Conservatives are the ones who aren’t well-intentioned. We know this because they treat minorities like they treat everybody else. We know liberals are well-intentioned because they treat Blacks and Hispanics like little children.
Yeah, you go with that.
There is, of course, an alternative explanation for why White liberals behave as if they look down on minorities as inferior: it may be because they look down on minorities because they believe them to be inferior.
Ever consider that? Isn’t that the assumption in every affirmative action program? In every attempt to eliminate testing requirements? In fact, in every DEI initiative is an assumption that minorities are incapable of achieving success on their own.
Most Whites, particularly socio-political liberals, now endorse racial equality. Archival and experimental research reveals a subtle but reliable ironic consequence: White liberals self-present less competence to minorities than to other Whites—that is, they patronize minorities stereotyped as lower status and less competent. In an initial archival demonstration of the competence downshift, Study 1 examined the content of White Republican and Democratic presidential candidates’ campaign speeches. Although Republican candidates did not significantly shift language based on audience racial composition, Democratic candidates used less competence-related language to minority audiences than to White audiences.Across five experiments (total N= 2,157), White participants responded to a Black or White hypothetical (Studies 2, 3, 4, S1) or ostensibly real (Study 5) interaction partner. Three indicators of self-presentation converged:sophistication of vocabulary selected for an assignment, competence-relatedtraitsselectedfor an introduction, and competence-related content of brief, open-ended introductions. Conservatism indicators included: self-reported political affiliation(liberal-conservative), Right-Wing Authoritarianism (values-based conservatism) and Social Dominance Orientation (hierarchy-based conservatism). Internal meta-analyses revealed that liberals—but not conservatives—presented less competence to Black interaction partners than to White ones. The simple effect was small but significant across studies, and most reliable for the self-reported measureof conservatism. This possibly unintentional but ultimately patronizing competence-downshift suggests that well-intentioned liberal Whites may draw on low-status/competence stereotypes to affiliate with minorities
Liberal racism is a very real, measurable phenomenon, based upon the assumption that minorities are unintelligent, incompetent, and lack self-control.
The latter is made clear by the criminal justice policies the Left is putting forward: they refuse to hold minority criminals responsible for their actions because, apparently, they do not believe they are competent moral actors capable of behaving in a civilized fashion.
That assumption is not true, and in fact, encourages criminality among minorities who are assured they will catch a break. For many, it becomes rational to behave as a criminal because they can get away with it.
The statistics are actually pretty clear that success in America is not determined by race. Whites are, among ethnic groups, pretty much in the middle of the pack in income compared to other racial groups. This data is a bit old, but the chart is so easy to understand that I chose to use it. The current data is not much different.
It’s like the movie War Games. The media is the enemy this time. The emerging pattern is that they’ve started (and lost) almost all of the wars recently. This war is against the middle class, the everyday Joe six-pack and flyover country.
The high IQ part of this is to ignore them and pay attention to the facts.
Lord Monkton has been a shining star on the truth of the climate issue. Here is what he delivers as damning evidence.
I know people who worship the climate as their religion and wouldn’t believe the truth were it this clear. I marvel at how far some will go to be wrong. SMH
The true economic, social, and political cost of the measures proposed by governments (in the West only) to destroy their nations’ businesses and jobs and to impoverish every household is becoming ever more visible. At last, therefore, a few brave souls in the scientific and academic communities are beginning to question what I shall call — with more than a little justification — the Communist Party line on climate change.
Three devastating equations have emerged, each of which calls fundamentally into question the imagined (and imaginary) basis for the economic hara-kiri by which the West is throwing away its gentle and beneficent global hegemony. Power and wealth are passing inexorably from the democracies of the West to the communist-led tyrannies of the East.
However, the three equations stand firmly in the way. It is these three equations — simple enough to be explained here for the general reader, yet devastating enough utterly to destroy the official climate change narrative — that will soon lay low the enemies of prosperity, democracy, and liberty who have, until now, gotten away with undermining the West, no less from within than from without, by their childishly apocalyptic climate change narrative.
The first of these equations was presented to you here a few months ago. Therefore, I shall summarize that discussion briefly. The equation comes in two versions: the wrong version, on the basis of which the climate science establishment felt improperly confident that unabated emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmless greenhouse gases would soon bring about Thermageddon, and the corrected version, which shows that IPCC’s predictions of large and dangerous global warming are false and without scientific foundation.
The system-gain factor is the variable by which the predicted 1.2 K direct warming by doubled CO2 in the air is multiplied to obtain the predicted final warming by doubled CO2 after taking account of feedback response, a knock-on, additional warming signal driven by and proportional to the direct or reference signal.
The erroneous version of the equation neglects what engineers call the base signal, the 260 K direct sunshine temperature. Climate scientists call this the emission temperature. It is the temperature that would obtain at the Earth’s surface in the absence of any greenhouse gases.
The 29 K total greenhouse effect is the sum of 8 K direct warming by natural greenhouse gases, 1 K direct warming by anthropogenic greenhouse gases, and 20 K total feedback response.
Multiply the 1.2 K direct doubled-CO2 warming by the erroneous system-gain factor 3.2 to get climatologists’ 3.85 K final doubled-CO2 warming. Sure enough, the average final or equilibrium doubled-CO2 warming predicted by the general-circulation models in the sixth and latest generation of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project is 3.85 K.
But the corrected system-gain factor bears in mind — as climatologists in this crucial respect do not — that the sun is shining and that, therefore, the dominant 260 K sunshine temperature must be included in the corrected equation. Therefore, the system-gain factor is not 29 / 9, or 3.2, but (260 + 29) / (260 + 9), or just 1.1. Then the final warming to be expected in response to the 1.2 K direct warming by doubled CO2 is not 3.85 K, but more like 1.3 K, which is small, harmless, and net-beneficial.
Climate scientists made their error when they borrowed the physics of feedback from a branch of engineering physics known as control theory. They did not understand what they had borrowed. When I pointed out their grave error to the world’s most eminent climatologist, he said he did not believe that the feedback processes in the climate (chiefly the extra water vapor — itself a greenhouse gas — that the air can hold as it is directly warmed by the non-condensing greenhouse gases) would respond to the sunshine temperature.
So I asked him how the inanimate feedback processes in the climate knew that at any given moment, such as the present, they should not respond in the slightest to the 260 K sunshine temperature but should respond violently and extremely to the 9 K direct warming by natural and anthropogenic greenhouse gases. A Kelvin is a Kelvin is a Kelvin, I said. He had no answer to my question. He shuffled off, looking baffled.
It was hitherto unnoticed that feedbacks such as the water vapor feedback (the only one that really matters — all the others broadly self-cancel) necessarily respond to the entire 269 K input signal or reference temperature. Therefore (I shall not show the working for this, but trust me), just 0.01 unit of increase in feedback strength would add as much as 1 K to the final warming by doubled CO2. But it is entirely impossible to measure feedback strength directly by any method, and certainly not to a precision of only a few hundredths of a unit.
Therefore, after correction of climate scientists’ error, no method of deriving predictions of anthropogenic global warming that is based on feedback analysis — as just about all of the current official predictions are — is capable of producing predictions that are any better than mere guesswork.
The IPCC, not realizing this even though it has been told about the error, bases very nearly all of its predictions upon feedback analysis. Its 2013 Fifth Assessment Report mentions “feedback” more than 1,100 times, its 2021 Sixth Assessment Report more than 2,600 times. In short, the IPCC’s entire analysis of the “how much warming” question is meaningless and valueless.
How could so crass a mistake have been made? The answer is that when the climatologists asked the control theorists how to calculate feedback response, they were told that they should base the calculation only on the gain signal (in the climate, the 9 K direct warming by natural and anthropogenic greenhouse gases) and on the 20 K feedback response. Control theorists do things this way because in typical control-theoretic applications, such as electronic long-distance telephone circuits or factory control processes, the feedback response signal is 10 to 100 times larger than any other signal in the circuit. Therefore, neglecting the base signal usually makes no significant difference to the calculation, so they neglect it.
In the climate, however, it is the other way about. The base signal in the climate, the 260 K sunshine temperature, is almost 30 times the 9 K direct warming by greenhouse gases, and 13 times the feedback response. The sunshine dominates. Therefore, as common sense would in any event dictate, one cannot ignore it in carrying out the “how much warming” calculation.
The significance of this first equation, then, is that it proves beyond reasonable doubt that climatologists’ profitable but misguided whining about the rate of future global warming is based on a very large and very serious error of physics that has gone undetected until now because different scientific disciplines — here climatology and control theory — are increasingly narrow in their specialization. The climate scientists did not (and do not) understand the control theory they had borrowed, and the control theorists did not (and do not) realize what climate scientists have done with the borrowed theory. It is in this disastrous interdisciplinary compartmentalization that the climate change scare is rooted.
The truth is that one must use methods other than feedback analysis to derive estimates of future anthropogenic warming. But all such methods, which are based on observation rather than theoretical manipulation of data in climate models, show far less global warming than diagnosis of feedback strength from the models’ outputs shows.
The simplest observational method is this. The IPCC in 1990 predicted that until 2090, the world would warm by between 0.2 and 0.5 K/decade, with a midrange estimate of 0.3 K/decade (i.e., 2 to 5 K per century equivalent, with a best estimate of 3 K). Likewise, now as then, the IPCC predicts that final warming in response to doubled CO2 in the air will be 2 to 5 K, with a best estimate of 3 K. However, according to the University of Alabama in Huntsville, which maintains the most accurate and up-to-date satellite temperature record, since the IPCC’s First Assessment Report in 1990 there has only been 0.136 K warming per decade.
This slow warming is equivalent to less than 1.4 K per century or, per CO2 doubling, well below the lower bound of the IPCC’s range of predictions, and less than half its midrange prediction.
Note how close that 1.36 K is to the 1.3 K we obtained by correcting official climatology’s error of feedback analysis. A more elaborate method, known as the energy-budget method, also shows about 1.3 K warming per century or per CO2 doubling, with a range of 1 to 2 K. The first equation, then, powerfully suggests that our sins of emission have not caused and will not cause a problem, crisis, emergency, or apocalypse.
But let us pretend, just for the sake of argument, that climatologists had not perpetrated their elementary error and that, therefore, there might, after all, be an impending cataclysm. In that case, what can we do about it? The second of our three equations demonstrates that the currently favored method of Saving the Planet — replacing coal and gas generation with windmills and solar panels — will make little or no difference to global temperature.
Our second equation says excess generation E by wind and solar power in a given grid is the difference between the installed nameplate capacity N of wind and solar in that grid (their output in ideal weather) and the total mean hourly demand D for electricity from that grid.
Obvious though this equation seems, grid operators and governments are, as far as we can discover, wholly unaware of it. But by rights it ought to signal the E = N — D of any further costly destruction of the countryside and the oceans, the birds, bees and bats, the whales and dolphins by ugly solar panels and wind turbines.
Douglas Pollock, the Chilean engineer who discovered the equation, has investigated several Western national grids and has plotted the results on the graph below.
The United States could, if it wished, add more wind and solar power to its grid, but the cost would be enormous and the CO2 emissions abated surprisingly small, because coal and gas-fired backup generation must be kept running at wasteful spinning reserve at all times in case the wind drops and the sun goes down.
However, the seven countries listed as already exceeding the fundamental hourly-demand limit on wind and solar capacity will not reduce CO2 emissions at all if they try installing any more wind and solar power. All they will do is to drive up the cost of electricity, which is already eight times greater in the West than in China or India, where the expansion of the world’s cheapest form of electricity — coal-fired power — is continuing rapidly.
This second of our equations also puts an E = N — D to the notion that replacing real autos with electric buggies at twice the capital and running costs will reduce emissions. It won’t, because in most Western countries, wind and solar power are already at or above their Pollock limit, so that the power for the buggies will have to come from coal and gas, at least until the soi-disant “Greens” abandon their sullen opposition to the peaceful use of nuclear power.
The Traffic-Light Tendency — the Greens too yellow to admit they’re really Reds — are opposed to coal-fired, gas-fired, oil-fired, nuclear, and hydroelectric generation. Yet wind and solar power, which they favor, cannot keep the lights on 24/7; are cripplingly expensive; are cruel to landscape, seascape, and wildlife; and, though their exceptionally low energy density, do more environmental damage per MWh generated than any other form of power.
Why, then, do the climate communists advocate wind and solar power and oppose just about everything else? They do so precisely because there is no quicker or more certain way to destroy the economies of the hated West and to end its hegemony than to destroy its energy infrastructure. For that, and not Saving the Planet, is their true objective. What they advocate makes sense when seen in that light and makes no sense otherwise.
So to our third simple but decisively powerful equation. Let us pretend not only that there may be a global warming Armageddon (though we have proven there will not be), but also that we can do something about it by the proliferation of windmills and solar panels (though we have proven that we can achieve nothing by that method except crippling our grids and vastly increasing the already prohibitive cost of electrical power, further turning the terms of trade to the advantage of the communist-led countries that are vastly increasing their coal-fired generation).
How much global warming would worldwide attainment of net zero emissions by 2050 prevent? It is a measure of the extent to which such little debate as the far left have permitted on the climate question has been stifled, and of the extent to which the objective of climate policy is political rather than scientific or existential, that this question does not seem to have been asked before.
I was in Parliament the other day, talking to a Conservative M.P. I asked him what he thought about global warming. He said, “I’m a mathematician, so I know we have to show leadership by getting to net zero emissions by 2050.”
“So,” I replied, “if the whole world followed the policy of just about all the British governing class and went to net zero emissions by 2050, how much global warming that would otherwise have occurred by that year would be prevented?”
His face was a picture. He had clearly never thought of asking that surely elementary question. When I told him the answer, he was dismayed. But the answer is not in doubt, for the necessary equation is again unchallengeably simple.
First, we need to know how much global warming would occur on present trends. Typically, one goes back at least 30 years, so let us go back to 1990, the date of the IPCC’s First Assessment Report. Since then, our sins of emission have added one 30th of a unit of influence every year in a near-perfect straight line. All those trillions squandered on trying to make global warming go away have not altered that third-of-a-century-long trend one iota.
Now, if the whole world went immediately to net zero emissions today, we should be able to abate 27/30 units of our influence on the climate. But if we get there in a straight line over the next 27 years, we shall abate about half of those 0.9 units — i.e., 0.45 units.
Next, how much global warming would each unit we abate prevent? Here, as throughout, we are using official figures. The IPCC says that the warming over the next 70 years if we suddenly doubled the CO2 in the air today would be 1.8 C. This is known as the “transient doubled-CO2 response,” or TCR. And, again according to the IPCC, there is an “effective radiative forcing,” or ERF, of 3.93 units of anthropogenic influence in response to doubled CO2. Therefore, temperature change per unit of influence is 1.8 / 3.93, or 0.46 K per unit.
Multiply the 0.45 units the world would abate if all nations went to net zero by 0.46 K per unit, and the total warming prevented by global net zero emissions would be just 0.2 K.
The M.P., on being told this strikingly puny figure, said: “Oh, well, there must be a very large uncertainty in that number.”
“No,” I said, “there isn’t. The IPCC predicts up to 5 K warming this century. But even if the whole world actually got to net zero emissions, which it won’t because the communist-led nations are expanding their coal-fired capacity at a very rapid rate, somewhere between 0.1 and 0.3 K of that warming would be prevented by 2050. The midrange estimate is 0.2 K.”
In fact, even less warming than this would be prevented. For we have used official midrange estimates to calculate the 0.2 K warming that even global net zero would prevent. But those estimates are proven to have overstated the true medium-term rate of global warming by more than double. So the true warming the world would prevent if all nations, rather than just those of the empty-headed West, were to go together to net zero would be less than 0.1 K.
Then I added the clincher. I told the M.P. that the U.K. National Grid had estimated $3.6 trillion as the cost of re-engineering the grid to meet the net zero target; that electricity generation accounts for less than a quarter of U.K. emissions; and that, therefore, the cost to the U.K. of getting to net zero by 2050 would be more than $15 trillion, or six years’ total annual GDP.
Therefore, I said, every $1 billion the world squanders on trying to get to net zero emissions by 2050 would prevent only one 16-millionth of a degree of warming. Did he, as a mathematician, consider that to be value for money?
The M.P. capitulated. “The trouble with you, Monckton,” he said, “is that you take impossible positions on everything, and you’re always right.”
Now, the purpose of this unusual exercise has been to reduce the apparently complex global warming argument to just three equations so simple that they can be explained to a layman without too much difficulty, and then to explain them. In my submission, any one of these three equations, on its own, would in a rational world be more than sufficient to lead Western governments to abandon all their global warming mitigation policies at once.
The three equations together are devastating. There is no global warming problem; even if there were, our current method of addressing it will make no difference; and even if the whole world attained net zero by 2050, global temperature would barely change.
These three arguments are simple, but they are strong. It is only because the far left have captured the debate and have silenced discussions such as this that governments have allowed themselves to be fooled. Soon, that will change, whether the far left and their paymasters and instructors in the FSB and the Ministry of State Security like it or not. For the laws of physics, of economics, and of mathematics are not up for repeal.
I did a conference while at IBM with Eric Schmidt and Sam Palmisano as the Keynote speakers. I found out from him way before they came clean that the do no evil at Google was crap. They also track everything you do, creep your emails, chats and every keystroke on your search. They are evil and that bad.
I change up my search habits and protection frequently to get away from them as much as possible.
At the inception of mass surveillance in the US lies the partnership between government and Google. Page and company have paved the way to more efficient methods of intelligence- reducing the need for human intel gathering and placing your every search at their fingertips.… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Among Page and Sergey Brin’s earliest partners are DARPA, NSA, and the CIA. While Google has attempted to scrub some of its connections to early grant programs it is undeniable that at the core of Google’s founding is the intent to do the bidding of the intelligence community.… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
If you aren’t afraid of the CIA, you should be. I don’t even want to get into everything as I don’t want to invite anymore trouble than they already give me.
Suffice it to say, if they will kill a president (JFK), run the deep state and anything else, be very afraid.
Also, don’t use Google whenever possible. I don’t doubt they have good tools, but they use them against you.
IBM recently became the first major company to acknowledge that it intends to substitute its workforce with artificial intelligence. CEO Arvind Krishna confirmed to Bloomberg that IBM will pause hiring plans, adding that the company intends to replace roughly 7,800 positions with AI systems over the next five years. In a separate Fox Business interview, Krishna explained that AI will target numerous white-collar jobs. Krishna noted that back-office functions, particularly in the human resources department, will be the first to be absorbed by AI. But accounting, finance, and other non-customer-facing areas might find algorithms and robots filling positions, too.
I’ve got news for investors. They could replace a hell of a lot more and be better off. They could do a twitter and lose 70% still be better off. During the business partner phase of my employment, I marveled at how incompetent they could be and still keep the doors open. They had 14 people for the job that I did at the time as a business partner. As it turned out, that was during the introduction of the PC era, so they were printing money and this excess of waste was overlooked.
Until John Akers, IBM was a job for life company with an army of blue soldiers. Unfortunately, you could also be one of the most useless employees and still have a great job with a high salary. It came crumbling down and Lou Gerstner had to save it or break it up. There was an internal joke called FUMU, fuck up move up. They’d just re-arrange the deck chairs if someone made a mistake and brush it under the rug.
One of the transfers from IBM to that company I was working for told me they had people they called the thinkers. They sat in their office and read the WSJ and drank coffee all day. They didn’t go to meetings or contribute, so he sarcastically said he thought they were paid to think. (The meme was just in time from wirecutter)
The other inside joke was the name of the program for the first layoffs. It was FAP, the financial assistance program. It is also an urban word for masturbating, what a lot of IBM employees did on the clock.
When those same employees had to go get jobs after the first cut and told me it’s hard to get a job in the real world. Most couldn’t.
One of my IBM bosses, maybe one of the best, Jim Neumann explained it to me. He said you went to elementary school, middle, high schools then college. When you graduated, you went to the next school at IBM, but never got out of school.
Who they had working there when I left made me wonder how they were in business.
One of the biases there was that if you were from NY, you were a better employee. The headquarters are there so they would farm the ones they wanted out to jobs around the world and then bring them to NY to run the place. There were offices everywhere, but you were considered a second class worker unless you were in NY. I turned 2 job offers down to move there because it was so awful. The people were backstabbers and the area is one of the worst the worst in the company (or country not counting California). How they thought they were better was a clear signal of something wrong. A lot of them told me they were stuck there with golden handcuffs, but wished they could get out.
One asshole VP from Columbia U used to talk down to those of us at RTP. He did so in a way that would get any employee terminated in the real world. I saw people not help him just to not have to interact with him.
It only got worse under Ginni Rometty. It turned into a mean girls club with the excuse that Ginni said so, as the lead in to what you wanted done. She managed to halve the stock price during her tenure.
No one ever printed it fully, but they were full on in the diversity world and hired a lot of questionable people. The jobs and products reflected it. Some of the worst bosses for females were women. The homosexuals got away with yelling and treating people badly with immunity and the black head of diversity made racist remarks constantly. They have been woke for a long time while hiding it.
So artificial intelligence is going to replace those jobs. They really only need the artificial as a lot of the jobs never had fully intelligent people in it anyway.
I wonder if the rest of the world is getting tired of the MSM egging on the mentally deficient or deranged people. They gang up like the mean kids on the playground who got together to bring someone down to build themselves up.
Anyway, here is some woke crap because that is what it is. Look below for definitions from the left who try to ruin our lives with speech restrictions. Here’s your woke hint. If it’s about straight, white, christian men, it’s bad, ergo woke.
The word “woke” has become synonymous with leftism. At its core, “wokeism” is essentially a cult-like religion for the far-left, who think everything that is pro-America or pro-tradition is somehow an attack on specific, marginalized groups. “Woke” people parade throughout the nation as professional victims and make everything about them, and take narcissism to a whole new level. The Media Research Center defines the word “woke” or “wokeism” as people or ideas who are committed to the most extreme left-wing views on issues like race, gender, crime, climate, the economy, and more. Woke people think that burning down buildings is a way of peacefully protesting. Woke people believe that abortion is healthcare and that you can pick any gender you want to be. They think Antifa is a myth and that we should stop using existing, reliable, and abundant domestic sources of energy. In practice, woke people push against common-sense morals and values and promote the perpetual victimhood of groups they’ve deemed “marginalized.” While it’s evident these ideologies are nuts, the media has become obsessed with these woke ideas while vilifying traditional values and normalcy. They silence opposition through censorship or by ignoring and dismissing other people’s opinions as “racist” or “hateful.”
Trying to silence someone for their beliefs is a cross between 1984 and Communism.
Critical Race Theory = anti-white positioning, or negation of people of European descent.
WASHINGTON — Self-described “woke” Defense Department schools official Kelisa Wing, whose anti-white social media comments garnered national attention last fall, has been reassigned to an unrelated role, The Post has learned.
The Defense Department in October launched a 30-day review of Wing — the now-former education activity chief diversity equity and inclusion officer — after her Twitter posts with disparaging comments about white people resurfaced.
Marvel used to make good movies. Mimicking real life, the guys were the hero’s with support from others. There was good story telling and we liked the hero’s, faults and all. They came through for us every time. Now, this:
Naturally, Alonso was a woke quota queen who lobbied to ruin Marvel movies with homosexuality, transvestites, and outright idiocy like changing the X-Men to the “X-People,” or some such nonsense.
Anyway, it looks to me, based on the box office numbers, that Alonso was pretty successful at ruining the Marvel juggernaut. Thanks primarily to woketardery, Marvel’s box office is down, and so is the audience’s goodwill. Marvel feminized Thor, gave us a hairy man-on-man kiss in the Eternals, desexualized everyone, and introduced new characters who are no fun at all because they are too busy whining about racism, sexism, and getting misgendered.
So cut the woke crap. Look what it is doing for Bud Light, Fox News, Maybelline, Smirnoff and others.
First of all, it is a study from Harvard, the most overrated study hall in the country. Since it only talks about the girls, it’s only half of the story, so I’ll fill in the details.
There is no making girls happy. If they are, it won’t last long and the next crisis has already left the train station and is arriving soon. That means the husbands are taking the toll on this one. Men don’t have a chance unless you totally don’t give a shit when she’s mad (This guys is the key to marriage)
Here is an excerpt and a link below, but I discount everything Harvard says as their woke policies have bred mediocrity.
Married women ‘had lower risk of cardiovascular disease, less depression and loneliness, were happier and more optimistic, and had a greater sense of purpose and hope’
Marriage positively affects women’s mental and physical health, which can lead to long-term health benefits, according to a recent study published in the journal Global Epidemiology.
Led by a team of Harvard researchers, the study examined over 11,830 American female nurses who took different marital pathways and assessed how their lives turned out over a 25-year span.
It found that those who got married “had lower mortality, lower risks of cardiovascular diseases, greater psychological wellbeing and less psychological distress,” the study’s summary states.
Moreover, researchers found that those who got divorced or separated had “greater psychosocial distress, and possibly greater risks of mortality, cardiovascular diseases, and smoking.”
Ying Chen, a research associate with the Human Flourishing Program at the Harvard Institute for Quantitative Social Science, told The College Fix in an email this week that “Marriage remains an important source of social support for many people.”
“Our results are consistent with the existing literature suggesting that, on average, [marriage] contributes to better health and wellbeing,” Chen said.
I bet the husband’s cardiovascular health went down the toilet because there is no report on that from Harvard.
I’m guessing the men are now drinking a whole lot more.
Don’t forget the joke about why Jewish men die early, they want to.
I named it Delusions of Adequacy on purpose. It is parts snark, sarcasm and self deprecation, all on purpose. It’s funny when I see it in other places, like this list of comments from performance reviews.
Some asshole somewhere thought this would be a good idea to write how they did. Employees work and extra job to influence them for their managers. I always knew when I would get the best review. I also knew when I would be relegated to the mid-pack.
I also knew from having to write them and receive them that they were BS. The salary was already decided prior to the review.
I hated Mondays when working, but even though the thought occurred to me, I didn’t kill anyone over it. I worked with a girl who used to stay up until 3 on Sunday night night in what she said was denial of the weekend being over. She was a crazy girl, but not this level of crazy.
In 1979, 16 year old Brenda Ann Spencer was arrested after killing two people in California. When asked why she did it, her reply was "I just don't like Mondays.” pic.twitter.com/wshbd2VD8h
It was either him or his pedophile brother that had to get the crown. It’s a pretty sad choice for a monarchy that once controlled one sixth of the world.
Queen Elizabeth held on as long as she could so that her subjects wouldn’t have to suffer him any longer than they will have to. It’s what happens when you marry in your family.
She and her father were what a monarch should be. They helped bring the country out of a war that could have left England speaking German by now.
It’s also odd that he is supposed to protect the Christian protestant faith when he favors Islam. His global warming hypocrisy of trying to force cutbacks of perfectly good energy sources are a joke. He jet sets around the world and has a fleet of planes, yachts, cars and a carbon footprint larger than some nations.
Even the new Queen Consort, or whatever Camilla really is titled is a trade off. We don’t have to suffer through Di, who was annoying and was only 1 for 2 in her kids. Harry is a blight on the Windsor name like his father. Full of ideas that are not only wrong, but are influenced by facts that are socially amenable, but still false. He let a wife who is bitter and self serving ruin the Windsor name because sparkles didn’t get her way. Of course she claimed racism because it is socially convenient. It’s still a lie. Even Chris Rock said it’s not racist, just in law problems because she is a pouting little child.
So Harry got sent to the cheap seats along with Taco Jill, since senile Joe doesn’t work the weekends. He’s going to wake up one day when sparkles dumps him when he isn’t useful to her anymore and realize he made as big of a mistake as Edward the VIII. He gave away a life of luxury, wealth and free mooching off the subjects of England for a spiteful B actress from Hollywierd (sparkles).
Maybe we should be grateful that they are becoming more irrelevant. He’s about as good as George III, who went crazy from inbreeding also.
Chuck is in charge of 15 commonwealth countries, but if anything of consequence happens, England couldn’t and probably wouldn’t be able to do anything about helping them. They’d bail on him in a second. The Falkland Islands is a one off.
It looks like they didn’t stop the grim reaper either.
Diogenes does a much better job roasting Chuckles than I could. Go see for yourself.
Excerpt:
Unlike the Great Kings of England of lore, Charlie III will not be fighting those nasty uppity French or Austrians on the continent for land and riches and fame. Nor will Chuck be separating the heads from bodies of his detractors or those who might partake in Palace Intrigue. Nor will Chuck be forced, for the purpose of military or political alliances, to take some butt ugly princess as his queen (that part is already taken care of).
These days Chucky Three Sticks, as the new King of All England, biggest battles won’t be against foreign Emperors or pissed off crazy cousins with large armies marching through neutral countries to threaten the British Empire. No, his battles will more likely be with with his little pedo prince brother Andrew and with the little tart Yoko Markle and her English Setter puppy Harry, from further disgracing the family and bringing down the Monarchy.
It’s also expected Chuck will be annoying his subject with his special interest, climate change, and advocating for all the Globalist agenda of making of the lives of his subjects even more uncomfortable than they already are. It also been said that as King, despite his increase in duties of the Monarch, Chuck will continuing to make time for his love of talking to plants in the royal garden.
BREAKING: The mass shooter in Allen today was a Hispanic male with what appears to be a gang tattoo on his hand. I’m putting a screenshot of it as it is against the 1984 truth speak narrative rules.
Of course it is an illegal because they have lost control of the border.
This isn’t about guns, it is about criminals invading the country. If they really cared, they would recognize that fentanyl is killing more Americans than guns. The media is protecting the failure in the White House.
Let’s not forget that Kamala Harris is the border czar. Since she is doing nothing, it’s squarely on her.
BREAKING: The mass shooter in Allen today was a Hispanic male with what appears to be a gang tattoo on his hand. pic.twitter.com/CUs4mJHrFl
Since my most clicked on post ever is Euphemisms for Stupid, I like this one. That post sat on top of Google at #1 for years as the list of how to call someone stupid.
I don’t care (too much) about what other people are doing, even if I think it is strange until they want to force it on others (Bud Light just learned about that). You can never go anywhere without them telling you they are Vegan (or vegetarian). Like an ex of mine who won’t go away, I have to hear about how self righteous they are for eating plants. Once I got told she was a vegan, I knew she was full on crazy.
I’ve always believed we are omnivores, but can chose the ratio of meat/veggies based on personal choice.
Since they want to appear morally superior, I never miss the chance to bring facts and science into their discussion, which I will now. I wish it weren’t from Harvard, but it’s what we have right now.
Nearly 1,000 scientists from around the globe have signed a declaration encouraging the consumption of meat, slamming movements to push plant-based diets as “zealotry.”
Researchers responsible for nine new studies in the Animal Frontiers journal made a joint declaration that red meat consumption is not only safe but necessary for the nutritional health of many populations around the world.
“Livestock-derived foods provide a variety of essential nutrients and other health-promoting compounds, many of which are lacking in diets globally, even among those populations with higher incomes,” according to The Dublin Declaration. “Well-resourced individuals may be able to achieve adequate diets while heavily restricting meat, dairy and eggs. However, this approach should not be recommended for general populations, particularly not those with elevated needs, such as young children and adolescents, pregnant and lactating women, women of reproductive age, older adults, and the chronically ill.”
A November 2022 Harvard study proclaiming the benefits of plant-based diets claimed diets based on “red and processed meat had the highest environmental impact out of all food groups in participants’ diets, producing the greatest share of greenhouse gas emissions and requiring the most irrigation water, cropland, and fertilizer.”
Researchers behind The Dublin Declaration refuted this argument, saying “farmed and herded animals are irreplaceable” in keeping up a “circular flow of materials in agriculture.” Livestock are not only able to convert large amounts of inedible biomass back into the natural cycle, they also do it while simultaneously producing high-quality food fit for consumption, according to the article.
“Livestock is the millennial-long-proven method to create healthy nutrition and secure livelihoods, a wisdom deeply embedded in cultural values everywhere. Sustainable livestock will also provide solutions for the additional challenge of today, to stay within the safe operating zone of planet Earth’s boundaries, the only Earth we have,” The Dublin Declaration concludes.
Animal-based diets, or livestock systems, are “too precious,” the Declaration argues, “to become the victim of simplification, reductionism or zealotry.”
Back to me.
Besides being annoying, let’s see if anyone cares about their diet choices.
Be healthy and eat some meat, and stop ruining other people’s life at the dinner table.
Nope, no one cares other than wishing they’d stfu about it and let us enjoy steak and bacon.
I think they can’t see or there is some defect in the clones. Storm Troopers went from deadly, murderous villains doing the work of the evil Lord Vader, to the 3 stooges who couldn’t hit Han Solo or Luke in a hallway a few feet wide in the prison cell.
When we used to have to code talk, we’d say she played softball or soccer. Everyone knew that meant lesbian. Now, we had the worst attended sport of all, the WNBA, of which it is projected as 98% lesbian. Besides being a terrible sport to watch, these players are usually the butch version, not the one’s you’d want to look at. Their before and during Covid attendance didn’t change much it is such a terrible spectator sport.
What was under reported was the sexual preying on the young by coaches and older players. It kind of sucks as Caitlin Clark finally made us want to watch at least her college games. I don’t want to know or have it thrown in my face. She’s worth watching as a player and who she sleeps with has nothing to do on the court. Unless it becomes a political playing card.
What does matter is that these girls are being molested. Were it men, they’d be stringing them up by the balls and putting them in jail. Somehow it is overlooked in girls sports. Maybe if you look at the lack of attendance, it’s because no one cares.
When you are an adult, make your own choices and pay the consequences. That they are hurting kids is another issue.
Believe it or not, there’s a juicy well-kept secret about women’s sports hiding in plain sight that people don’t talk about much. The truth is, women’s sports can be a groomer’s paradise, like some sleazy “Club Med,” where predators are able to roam around and freely target anyone without fear of retribution. However, let’s be clear: we’re not discussing male predators here; rather, the focus is on female groomers.
We’re referring to older female coaches and strong veteran players who are grooming younger female athletes and turning women’s sports into a lesbian-making factory.
While the image of a “lesbian factory” might elicit a chuckle, the prevalence of lesbianism within women’s sports is off the charts. Even the Washington Post can’t ignore it.
Alyssa is dating DeWanna who used to be married to Candice; Jasmine and Natisha are engaged, and Natisha and Courtney used to date. Allie and a different Courtney are married, while Diana married her former teammate, Penny. No, this isn’t an episode about Alice’s chart on “The L Word”: It’s the WNBA, where romances among teammates and league rivals are as expected as a lethal three-point shot.
The Washington Post piece goes on to admit that this a phenomena that only happens in women’s sports. This should be a huge red flag, and it would be if the this tale involved men, like we saw with girls swimming and gymnastics, but because the groomers are women, nobody seems to care. However, that’s a real shame, because once again, vulnerable women are being abused.
So many “Rah-Rah-Rah, My DAUGHTER” Republican Dads are worried about their precious angels being groomed into the transsexual lifestyle on TikTok. Well, maybe ESPN-loving, Bud-Light-swilling fathers should be more worried about their daughters being groomed into lesbians with all the sports and athletic activities they are being pushed into.
But seriously, the feminist movement has been so successful that Republican Dads are more worried about their daughters learning how to swing a golf club or shoot a jump shot than they are worried about their daughters learning how to cook up a mean apple pie—and no one ever talks about this.
One heterosexual former WNBA athlete spoke out on this topic. Candace Wiggins estimates that 98 percent of the women in the WNBA are lesbians—an eyebrow-raising number.
“Me being heterosexual and straight, and being vocal in my identity as a straight woman was huge,” Wiggins said. “I would say 98 percent of the women in the WNBA are gay women. It was a conformist type of place. There was a whole different set of rules they [the other players] could apply.”
According to Wiggins, if you weren’t part of the “Lesbian Club Med,” you paid a price. She describes a damaging culture within the WNBA where she was singled out and bullied for being heterosexual.
“People were deliberately trying to hurt me all of the time. I had never been called the B-word so many times in my life than I was in my rookie season. I’d never been thrown to the ground so much. The message was: ‘We want you to know we don’t like you.’ “
The WNBA plays by different rules. For example, recently, the head coach of the Miami University (Ohio) Redhawks women’s basketball team, DeUnna Hendrix, stepped down from her position after intimate text messages revealed she was having a steamy sexual affair with a much younger player.
An older coach with a young, vulnerable player… imagine the headlines if a male coach was involved with a young female player—he’d be tarred, feathered, branded a pervert, and his life and career would be over. However, Ms. Hendrix will likely face none of that and will shake this off, and go on to be a celebrated lesbian coach, mentor, activist, and trailblazer, blah blah blah.
But it’s not just the WNBA facing these “grooming” questions. Women’s soccer also attracts an absurd number of lesbians.
There’s a couple of major differences between women’s soccer and men’s soccer. One: The U.S. women are good at it. Two, women’s soccer is a hell of a lot gayer.
Yesterday, “content producer” Alex Binley from ITV News published an article about why, exactly, so many dykes excel at this sport. It’s a good question. By Binley’s count, there were at least 41 openly gay players or coaches during the Women’s World Cup this year. The last Men’s Word Cup, in contrast, had a whopping zero. So, what gives?
Liberals will answer that question much differently than the rest of us. Liberals believe the reason for this staggering contrast between men’s and women’s sports is largely due to “homophobia.”
Binley says this is largely due to homophobia. She says that men’s soccer, especially outside of the U.S., is chock full of homophobes (as well as sexists and racists) who would not welcome openly gay male players in the sport.
This is a tiresome, lazy, rubber-stamp response. However, critical thinkers would look at these scenarios and at least entertain the theory that the LGBT ideology contributes to greatly to this grooming mentality and behavior that permeates women’s sports. It’s based around this notion that all girls have some secret underlying “lesbian tendencies,” and that notion then becomes a twisted justification for coaches and players to target vulnerable girls. Perhaps they push this false narrative that a person is depressed because they are not being true to their authentic self, and then use that as a tactic to manipulate and control their victims.
Unfortunately, this is a strategy employed not only by some parents, but also by certain transgender advocacy groups, particularly towards vulnerable and confused children.
The statistics speak for themselves; the disproportionate number of lesbians within women’s sports is not a normal occurrence. This trend indicates a culture of grooming and unhealthy behavior and abuse. It makes you wonder: how many female athletes initially identify as heterosexual, similar to Candace Wiggins, but ultimately succumbed to the bullying and grooming culture within their sport and transition to identifying as lesbian.
We’d love to share those statistics with you, but sadly, they don’t exist because nobody wants to acknowledge that this type of grooming is actually going on. We hope that changes.
It’s claim to fame is being the oldest University in the country, and Michael Jordan.
Now, it has gone into the toilet of wokeness and should be the home of the Frankfurt School instead of Columbia. I lived near there and worked with it’s graduates in RTP. Back then, it was busting at the seams trying to hold in how liberal it was. We could hardly stand them and their graduates while they pretended to be normal. They weren’t turning out stellar employees back then.
During that time, it was just about hating conservatism and history. Now, it has gone off the edge of hating the country it resides in and has gone full Marxist.
Have a Bud Light and wear Nike clothes while marching in lockstep with the politburo.
No way would I sent my kids to that indoctrination camp of the liberals socialists.
Let’s list the ways it has gone bad, starting with hating the constitution:
673 university professors sign letter opposing courses on America’s founding, Constitution
Hundreds of professors at the University of North Carolina signed a public letter Tuesday opposing legislation that would require university students to take courses on America’s government and founding documents.
The 673 UNC Chapel Hill professors revealed the public letter Tuesday, arguing the new courses and another bill in the North Carolina House of Representatives would constitute an infringement on the university’s “academic freedom.”
The first piece of legislation, House Bill 96, would require students to take a 3 credit-hour course covering America’s founding and history. Required reading for the course would include the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Emancipation Proclamation, at least five essays from the Federalist Papers, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and the Gettysburg Address.
The professors argue the legislation “violates core principles of academic freedom” and “substitutes ideological force-feeding for the intellectual expertise of faculty.”
The second bill, H.B. 715, would eliminate tenure at UNC and its affiliated campuses, establish minimum class sizes and require colleges to report “all non-instructional research performed by higher education personnel at the institution.”
The 673 professors decry both bills as an attack on “expertise,” arguing the American government courses constitute little more than indoctrination. (imagine that, the history that made it great to be there now sucks because it’s not in their group think)
Pride came early at the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill, which launched events on Apr. 10 to celebrate the LGBTQ community.
UNC’s Pride Week, which commemorated the twentieth anniversary of the university’s LGBTQ Center, happened in April because the semester ends before Pride Month in June, according to the student newspaper, The Daily Tar Heel.
The Carolina Student Union Art Gallery hosted the first of five events by featuring an LGBTQ exhibit throughout the week.
Another event included student volunteers and LGBTQ Center staff stationing themselves in “The Pit”–a central, iconic location on campus–for Pride in the Pit. The Daily Tar Heel reported that activities included “a trivia game for visitors to test their knowledge about LGBTQ+ topics” and “button-making.”
Students were invited to participate in a “Rainbow Walk” on Apr. 13, with Pride Week culminating in “The Story of Us: Oral Histories of LGBTQIA+ Alum.” During this performance, a cast of mostly alumni actors read accounts of LGBTQ student experiences at UNC “from the 1950s through the 2010s,” Indy Weekreported.
The description of Pride Week also says that alumni led tours with “previews of LGBTQIA+ spaces on campus,” and they “provide[d] insight into some resources available for queer students at Carolina.”
In July 2022, UNC hosted Queerolina, “an online history exhibition” launched by the Carolina Pride Alum Network (CPAN) as part of “The Story of Us.”
I don’t care if they think it’s cool to be a pervert, once you put a crack in the moral fiber of something, the water leaks forever.
Now the bad news, where at the University of North Carolina, some 673 professors signed a public letter last Tuesday protesting new legislation that would require university students within the Tar Heel State to learn about America’s founding documents — you know, the Declaration, the Constitution, the Gettysburg Address, stuff like that.
Even the writings of Martin Luther King Jr. fall into this category of foundational documents. And yet these faculty members are against it, calling it “indoctrination” and citing its encroachment on the principle of — you guessed it — academic freedom.
“House Bill 96 would require students to take a 3 credit-hour course covering America’s founding and history. Required reading for the course would include the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Emancipation Proclamation, at least five essays from the Federalist Papers, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.‘s Letter from Birmingham Jail and the Gettysburg Address.”
The professors complain that the legislation “violates core principles of academic freedom” and “substitutes ideological force-feeding for the intellectual expertise of faculty.”
Ah, yes, that would be the intellectual expertise of a faculty and an academic institution that in 2021 disgraced itself by offering a tenured professorship — the position of Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism — to New York Times journalist hack Nikole Hannah-Jones, the author of the universally debunked alternative history known as “The 1619 Project.”
Hating America is obviously alive and well there in Chapel Hill.
I hated being anywhere near that place. You used to be able to put up with it while the basketball team was competitive, but they didn’t even get to the tournament recently. It is a blight on a good area of the state. Everyone there march in line to the sickle and hammer now. Damn, am I glad to be out of there.
It’s academics suck and they are trying to ignore history by taking down statues, as if that changes what happened. They are a bunch of woke little Commie snowflakes.
Just when I thought they couldn’t get worse, hello, they found a way to ruin kids lives even more. It’s a shithole now headed down the same path as San Franfreakshow. We can see how that turned out.
Bad guys don’t obey the law. Ban them and you don’t have to worry about gun owners. No responsible gun owner with a legally bought gun committed a crime today. Conversely, what happened in Chicago every weekend…or Baltimore or New York.
Why do more crimes happen in gun free zones?
Well, there goes the argument about muskets and they didn’t know about automatic weapons, but then the 2nd amendment is for citizens to protect themselves from the government.
“The power of applying attention, steady and undissipated, to a single object, is the sure mark of a superior genius.”
Hey, I don’t know if it’s true because I’m not a superior genius, but I can concentrate on one thing because I am introverted. I can avoid caring what others think while I concentrate on the task at hand. I thought it might be an OCD trait. Maybe Chesterfield is proving me wrong.
Yep, she’s gone. It says leave of absence, but when you cost your company at least 5 billion and counting, along with a century old reputation, your ass is history.
She’s going down as the girl who did the worst marketing campaign in history (Gillette may argue this one) all in the name of woke and inclusivity. A college freshman would identify this as the textbook example of f**king up to the extreme.
The controversial marketing exec behind Bud Light’s partnership with Dylan Mulvaney has taken a leave of absence as the boycott against the beer brand rages on.
Ad Age reports that “Alissa Heinerscheid, marketing VP for the brand since June 2022, has taken a leave of absence, the brewer confirmed, and will be replaced by Todd Allen, who was most recently global marketing VP for Budweiser.”
In an interview on the Make Yourself At Home podcast from March 23rd, Heinerscheid revealed that the brand was in decline and they needed to “attract young drinkers… then there will be no Bud Light,” which led to the controversial partnership with trans TikToker Dylan Mulvaney.
Note: Bud replaced her with a man. He probably got marching orders to stop pissing off the once loyal customers and figure out a way to stop the hemorrhaging of profits and reputation.
We know it was created by a murderer who chopped up his girlfriend and is on Lenin’s birthday. The connection to communism is more than that coincidence.
It’s also not based on science, rather it is a religion for those worshipers (the uneducated).
They consistently fail to follow actual science and this year is no different. I’ve ranted about it as I find it so unbelievable that those who celebrate it want to show how wrong they are. Instead, I’ll link and put excerpts to the recent story about how wrong they got it on methane this time. I had to work with this crowd of ignorance when I got forced into supporting the fake green initiative. Even then I couldn’t believe how wrong they were, until I found out they did it for the money.
Here goes.
Remember all that talk about methane being the scariest greenhouse gas? The claims are behind the war on meat, rice, farts, gas stoves, fracking, and just about everything else in the known universe that improves human life.
Well, except farts. They really don’t improve human life that much, unless you have gas pains. Man, it sucks when you have gas pains.
The science behind the claims that methane is a powerful greenhouse gas is pretty straightforward, if you look at only part of the science. Methane indeed traps more heat inside the atmosphere than CO2, by a wide margin. It disperses much more quickly, with a short life in the atmosphere, but if you only consider the warming impact it indeed is quite powerful.
Yeah, well, there is a huge problem with that claim. While technically true in some abstract sense, it is much less true when you look at all the effects methane in the atmosphere has on global temperatures. In other words, it is the sort of claim that relies upon your ignorance of the multiple effects of methane gas in the atmosphere–some of which are known widely, and many of which even climate “scientists” didn’t know when they made their wild claims about doom from leaking natural gas.
"If you had said on March 15 that people were making too big a deal about the warming effects of methane, you’d have been branded a 'climate denier.' Now, you’re just following the science." https://t.co/6WYOTp4wl1
New research shows that methane is still a powerful greenhouse gas, but nothing like what is claimed regularly.
This is the sort of thing that happens all the time in climate research, where variables are viewed and modeled in isolation based upon a limited set of data, and then the “scientists” extrapolate the heck out of the limited data and come up with models that are, frankly, ridiculous.
Methane warms the Earth when the gas absorbs longwave radiation. But it also cancels out some of that effect, counterintuitively, by absorbing shortwave radiation.https://t.co/hSplNPIB87
Then they pick the most extreme outcomes from models with the worst outcomes, and call it “settled science.” It is exactly the sort of thing you see in nutrition research, for example. Creating simplistic models from limited data interpreting complex and highly interdependent systems as if they mirror the falling of a bowling ball and a feather in a vacuum.
And the results, as you can see in the real world, are quite different. Bowling balls and feathers fall at the same rate in a vacuum, but once you introduce the atmosphere a feather can “fall upwards” on a breeze while the bowling ball crashes down as predicted.
Methane is a greenhouse gas with dual personalities. It heats Earth’s atmosphere 28 times as potently as carbon dioxide, gram for gram. But its absorption of the sun’s radiation high in the atmosphere also alters cloud patterns — casting a bit of shadow on its warming effect.
So rather than adding even more thermal energy to the atmosphere, as previously thought, methane’s solar absorption sets off a cascade of events that reduces its overall warming effect by about 30 percent, researchers report March 16 in Nature Geoscience.
Oops. Kinda missed that one. Oh well.
Also, you may note that key point: gram for gram. There are a lot more grams of CO2 than methane out there. Altogether the findings change the equations quite a bit, and those equations are still very simplified versions of the real world. Simplified versions that in all likelihood don’t reflect reality.
The result is “counterintuitive,” says climate scientist Robert Allen of the University of California, Riverside. It happens because of the way that methane’s shortwave absorbance affects clouds in different layers of the atmosphere, Allen and colleagues’ simulations suggest.
When methane absorbs shortwave radiation in the middle and upper troposphere, above about three kilometers, it further warms the air — leading to fewer clouds in that upper layer. And because methane absorbs shortwave radiation high up, less of that radiation penetrates down to the lower troposphere. This actually cools the lower troposphere, leading to more clouds in that layer.
These thicker low-level clouds reflect more of the sun’s shortwave radiation back out to space — meaning that less of this solar radiation reaches Earth’s surface, to be converted into longwave radiation.
One of the biggest problems with climate science, as it stands, is that it cannot explain the natural variations in the Earth’s temperatures, which have swung wildly more than anything predicted from human activity. Clearly, those natural variations need to be understood first before adding in anything that human beings do.
Not that human beings are doing nothing. We are. The scale may not be understood, but the fact itself is pretty easy to understand. We are changing the atmosphere and the reflectivity of the Earth, changing the biome, and such changes will have some effect on the climate. But any claims that we have a clear idea of what those changes will be exactly are pure bunkum. We don’t. We don’t know the scale, and we don’t know the what.
What we do know is that massive changes to the economy will have drastic impacts on human well-being, just as the vast industrialization has improved lives and extended lifespans dramatically. Tens of years have been added to lifespans, food security has been established for almost everybody, and the prospects for further improvements without industrialization of the third world drop dramatically.
And, of course, we know that every single prediction of the apocalypse has been laughably wrong.
Question 1 is the most interesting, given that white is the absence of color. Question 3 is about giving the Covid Jab to perfectly healthy people, or worse those who already had it and have natural immunity.
There are two easy answers that no one wants to use. The second is the real answer in the title of this post
First, nuclear power. It’s clean, safe and as affordable as the waste of money that has occurred chasing carbon as a bogeyman. It has it’s detractors, but if the climatards were serious it would be the main source of their energy. They just want to penalize the USA and some western countries and it’s petroleum production to line their wallets. They don’t mind using other countries gas. That puts our country at a disadvantage for cost of goods produced and sold. It’s on purpose. We already saw our economic freedom between 2016 and 2020 with fracking.
Here is a recent example of one western country cutting it’s own throat, but proves that it is a cheaper solution for energy.
Germany just shut down its last nuclear power plant
Now, German energy prices are increasing by up to 45%
On top of that, Germany started importing nuclear energy from France on Saturday to cover a shortfall 🤦♀ pic.twitter.com/2kJ5YjuOd2
The wrong people are leading the the self created energy crisis and climate scam.
The real answer is fusion energy. It is self perpetuating and an endless source. Of course that would mean the end of the climate gravy train and control of the narrative that we are being assaulted with.
Here goes:
On Dec. 5, for a fraction of a second, a man-made star was created at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California. The occasion was an experiment in nuclear fusion that succeeded in doing something no fusion experiment had done before: It emitted more energy than it consumed.
The experiment amounted to a big step forward in basic science. If the technology used at NIF is developed to its full potential, it could provide a virtually endless source of energy that would be clean and inexpensive. You’d think that nuclear fusion technology would be pushed forward by billions of dollars in research and development, but you’d be wrong, because it doesn’t fit into the “climate change” industry’s mantra that any nuclear power generation has to be bad.
Nuclear fusion is what happens on and in the sun. At temperatures up to 27 million degrees Fahrenheit, the sun fuses types of hydrogen — tritium and deuterium — under enormous pressure in such a way as to produce enough heat and light to warm and illuminate our planet, which is about 93 million miles away.
One of the benefits of fusion technology is that it produces virtually no nuclear waste like a nuclear fission plant does. Moreover, the “half-life” of the “activated” materials is far shorter than those of the conventional nuclear power plant, which produces “hot” waste such as fuel rods that are radioactive for hundreds of years.
Oh, it has it’s problems, but we went from the Wright brothers to the moon in 66 years. If we were serious about the problem of replacing petroleum, then it would get solved.
For example:
First, the “target” mass of tritium and deuterium is destroyed by the fusion that takes place within it. To render the technology feasible, you have to create targets about 10 times per second, not over a period of months as they are now.
Second, fusion emits neutrons that, at this stage, have to be converted into heat and steam to power a turbine engine that will produce electricity. Along the path of research, scientists may discover how to convert neutrons into electricity more simply and directly.
Both of these problems have to be solved — as well as the “unk-unks” that are encountered — before fusion can be made into a usable technology. And that’s where the government has to come in.
But if the Government was actually interested in the energy/climate issue other than an ATM…..
Industry can only spend money on research that is paid for either by the government or by rapid transformation into profitable products. The government’s proper role is to fund research into technologies that can later be made into profitable products. It did so many times, from the development of stealth aircraft to former President Donald Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed,” which developed the COVID vaccines in months rather than the decade or more it would normally have taken.
Fusion research will continue, but at a far slower pace than it could were it better funded. The outlook is good, but fusion won’t, at the current rate, produce practical — i.e., usable — fusion technology for at least a decade or two.
What is needed is a major research effort, such as the Manhattan Project, which produced nuclear weapons in the 1940s. But that won’t happen while President Joe Biden and his “climate change” minions govern us. Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro said on March 1: “As the Secretary of the Navy, I can tell you that I have made climate one of my top priorities since the first day I came into office.” Climate change is his priority rather than rebuilding our Navy, which has far fewer ships than the Chinese navy.
As always, it comes down to money. The climate change clowns are investing in reducing carbon emissions — eliminating fuels such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum — and converting us to weather-dependent sources of energy such as wind and solar power. They won’t even consider building more nuclear power plants regardless of how safe they are. (One of my friends used to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. He often reminds me that our nuclear-powered Navy ships have had zero accidents.)
Our government wastes billions on too many idiotic ideas. They are far too many to rehearse here. If we have a new president in 2025, Biden’s priorities can be tossed aside, and those billions can be spent in productive research and development of fusion and other technologies that could make us more secure and energy independent again.
Lastly, we aren’t going to run out of petroleum reserves, and it is the cheapest and easiest source of energy. Hating it is the cheapest and easiest source of increasing bank accounts and control of the masses by tyrants.
Everything is about equality these days. The reality is that Males and females are not equal and will never be. It’s why men pretending to be girls are terrible at it (and look ugly while trying), except for kicking ass in sports. Ergo not equal. It’s why girls aren’t good superhero’s. I wish they would stop it, along with the woke thinking that they are in real life. A girl is a girl and a guy is a guy.
First, girl action hero’s are not believable. In no world is a girl going to kick ass on a guy. Girls believing they are hero’s or are going to out fight a man are going to learn a hard lesson.
Hollywood is laying out an image of woman that is far more unrealistic and harmful than even the old Barbie doll image, which really could inspire women to pursue beauty and health if interpreted positively. Whereas there is no positive spin on encouraging women to see themselves as capable of going toe to toe with big men in a fight.
It is remarkably foolish. It is not just bad entertainment, it is not just bad and unrealistic and unimaginative writing, it is dangerous messaging. Messaging which has been taken up and believed by many women today who pursue combat roles in the army, conflict roles in the police and sport and many other things.
Messaging matters and this messaging needs to be challenged.
The Dangerous Message (lie) of the “Strong Female Protagonist”
The stereotypical “strong female protagonist” that many modern movies and television shows, books and comics want to foist on the general public are not just bad writing or uninteresting characters, they are dangerous messaging.
We have to remember that people are more often emotional rather than rational, and are far more likely to be convinced by consistently pushed rhetorical messaging than reasoned facts. This is a polite way of saying that many people are not that bright, and not that thoughtful about what they believe.
Therefore, presenting women consistently as being able to go toe to toe with men, is planting dangerous messages, anti-civilizational messages, in the minds of young men and women.
John C. Wright explains:
“If Supergirl is from Planet Krypton, fine, she can punch goons through solid brick walls, no problem. Ditto for Starfire of the Teen Titans. If Buffy the Vampire Slayer is possessed by all the strength of the ghosts of all the Slayers back to the First Slayer, fine, she has super duper strength and it is magic. Fine. That is all fine with me. (Supergirl is a horrible character, especially the latest one. Even Super dog is better)
But when the heroine is Hit Girl or Batgirl or some leggy blonde selected for her cup size rather than fighting ability, such portrayals of wispy little she-adventuresses able to tackle boatloads of thugs built like linebackers not only as absurdly unrealistic, they have the sinister tendency to make it socially acceptable for boys to hit girls.
This leads to girls getting their asses kicked: (note by me here, I studied martial arts for decades. I never had to go full speed ever against any female. In fact I had to take it easy on them in stand up sparring or on the mat. I was always faster, stronger and could out think them in strategy without much effort. It was like playing with kids)
Back to the source article and discussing why it isn’t misogynistic. Not one, but two girls of my close acquaintance both had this happen to them.
They had been convinced, and everyone had told them, and all the movies and television shows had shown them, that girls could fight boys and be victorious. One girl was shocked when a male friend of hers, just horsing around, pinned her down with one hand. She had always thought she’d be able to fend off an attacker. Not without an equalizer, she wouldn’t. The other friend was equally shocked when the boy she was with was walking down the beach with her, and he picked her up, (I do not know whether bride style or Tarzan style), and ran full speed down the beach with her. She realized with a shock that she could not have picked him up no matter what, not even in an emergency, not even if he was helping. These were not even linebackers built like Conan or men on the leading edge of physical strength for men, they were ordinary boys of ordinary strength.” Wright, John C.. Transhuman and Subhuman: Essays on Science Fiction and Awful Truth (pp. 325-326). Still Waters Books. Kindle Edition.
Back to me. It’s why I never believed that the Black Widow was a real or even a good Avenger. She was window dressing and best only when talking to the hero’s. Captain Marvel was a terrible movie and character. No one saw her as a hero and she didn’t even act like one, even with CGI. She was so woke they cut her out of Avengers Endgame except at the end.
In real life, if I were a soldier, I’d be mighty worried that if I got injured, that a girl would have to fireman carry my ass out of the battle. I’d rather have men around me that are big, strong and could fight and would save your life. That is reality.
Why Girls Shouldn’t Trust Other Girls About Relationships
Sitting around my mom while she was fixing one of her saris, giving us some life advice. Here is what she told us:
She was telling us all about how it’s important NEVER to ask a girlfriend about relationship problems. Because girls more often than not will lead you astray. And especially when girls are young they will knowingly or unknowingly ruin your life.
She has an employee who is a cute little 26yo newly wed. The girl complained to her about her husband and my mom gave her the other perspective from her husbands point of view. Made her rethink her whole position with more maturity. Girlfriends don’t do that. Matriarchs do
Girls want to win your favor. They want you to like them. So they will say whatever they can to be on your side. They don’t have the ability or experience to see the situation from all points of view, and they don’t have the integrity to disagree with or counter you to your face. (They are lying, which they are good at)
But the thing is, 50% of the time you ARE wrong and there are very few, perhaps one in a thousand girls, who will tell you the truth, even if it is not what you’d like to hear. And most women don’t have the experience of good relationships to give good advice
Another person to never take advice from are older women who have been unsuccessful in their relationships in life. I remember a woman I knew who had gotten divorced and she was lecturing me in her man hating bitter ways every time she talked to me. In one ear out the other! They are bitter (almost always liberal) cat ladies that carp about everything, men and other women.
The girl complained to my mom that her husband never took her out. My mom reminded her that he’s a truck driver and wants to be home because he’s out all week. She complained about not getting gifts and my mom reminded her he’s providing for her so she can work just for fun
Back to me. A girl I rode bikes with (and had to hold back not to drop her) told me that girls are mean. They’ll say you look good when it is a lie so you’ll keep wearing that outfit or dress that way. They lied on purpose to be mean to the other girl, then talked behind their backs. She turned out to be a bitch also.
Why can’t we let girls be girls and stop telling them to act like men? Conversely and I’ve written about it already (see the Bud Light posts a few down) that men make terrible pretend girls. It’s just ruining females for everyone, especially them.
This isn’t necessary, at least to do it to us this way.
Illegal immigration is costing taxpayers $151 billion every year — a 30% increase since 2017.
“The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers 2023,” a report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), concludes that taxpayers spend $182 billion annually on illegal immigrants. That number is partially offset by illegal aliens paying $31 billion in taxes. FAIR estimates that tax revenue is collected from 15.5 million illegal aliens — far more than the government’s 11.3 million estimated illegal alien numbers, which are based on population surveys.
The cost to taxpayers supporting 11-15 million people who refused to go through the legal process of crossing the border and applying for a green card that would allow them to work in the U.S. isn’t really the point. It’s the loss of sovereignty. Every other nation on earth is allowed to determine who gets in and who stays out. Why America has to be different in this regard is a mystery.
“As America struggles to meet countless societal needs while facing the realities of our staggering $31 trillion national debt, the costs of providing for millions of people who have no legal right to be in the United States continues to grow at an alarming rate,” FAIR President Dan Stein said in a statement.
Adding $151 billion to a $31 trillion national debt is immaterial. It’s the drain on resources — criminal justice, healthcare, and education — that matters. This is especially true since the costs of illegal immigration varies from state to state.
It doesn’t take a genius to know a guy isn’t born with boobs. Even if you put silicone in there, they still aren’t boobs if on a human born a male.
Nike could have picked any female in the world to promote their products, yet they picked a mentally health challenged boy with a dick to sell their workout products.
I doubt they will be as affected as Transnheuser-Busch because they have put the worst people as spokespersons already (I’m looking at you Colin Kaepernick, America hater and racist cry-baby). They have a solid track record for being in the woke dumpster.
Megyn Kelly sums it up perfectly: He has no idea what it is like to need and wear a sports bra. It’s also cringe worthy to see him prancing around like a pansy. Three women with six boobs calling Nike and their pretender out for disrespecting females.
“I’m sorry, Dylan doesn’t have breasts. Dylan’s been taking some sort of a hormone that has turned Dylan into some — I don’t know what’s happening there, but those are not breasts,” she said. “And Dylan doesn’t need any sort of a bra, never mind a sports bra.”
A self-described “Southern Mama” said she was “sick and tired” of Nike “pushing us around” before burning her sports bra and encouraging others to join in the viral challenge.
“All you real women out there – we are in the fight of all fights,” the woman who goes by the TikTok handle “chatterbox.mama” said to her more than 140,000 followers on Tuesday.
“Since the 1960s, we have been fighting for the right to be women,” she said.
“Nike, you should be ashamed of yourself,” the TikTok influencer continued.
“You chose a little boy with no breasts and some junk in his pants to represent real women.”
The TikToker declared: “Nike, I am done with you.”
“I will never, ever buy a Nike product for as long as I live,” she said.
“And there are millions and millions and millions of women just like me.”
She then challenged other women to “burn your Nike bras … as a way of showing our solidarity and how serious we are that we will be recognized.”
Not the best known of holidays, but finally something intellectually stimulating is being celebrated instead of kids cutting off their genitals. It is the actual science unlike what Fauci and the climatards claim.
The World Quantum Day aims at engaging the general public in the understanding and discussion of Quantum Science and Technology, namely:
how it helps us understand Nature at its most fundamental level,
how it helped us develop technologies that are crucial for our life today,
and how it can lead to future scientific and technological revolutions, and how these can impact our society.
The World Quantum Day is an initiative from quantum scientists around the World, launched on 14 April 2021 as the countdown towards the first global celebration on 14 April 2022.
It is a decentralized and bottom-up initiative, inviting all scientists, engineers, educators, communicators, entrepreneurs, technologists, historians, philosophers, artists, museologists, producers, etc., and their organisations, to develop their own activities, such as outreach talks, exhibitions, lab tours, panel discussions, interviews, artistic creations, etc., to celebrate the World Quantum Day around the World.
Here are the 10 biggest falsehoods—known for years to be false, not recently learned or proven to be so—promoted by America’s public health leaders, elected and unelected officials, and now-discredited academics:
1. SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has a far higher fatality rate than the flu by several orders of magnitude.
2. Everyone is at significant risk to die from this virus.
3. No one has any immunological protection, because this virus is completely new.
4. Asymptomatic people are major drivers of the spread.
5. Locking down—closing schools and businesses, confining people to their homes, stopping non-COVID medical care, and eliminating travel—will stop or eliminate the virus.
6. Masks will protect everyone and stop the spread.
7. The virus is known to be naturally occurring, and claiming it originated in a lab is a conspiracy theory.
8. Teachers are at especially high risk.
9. COVID vaccines stop the spread of the infection.
What if embedded in all of this is perhaps one more lie?
The greatest lie.
The one lie to rule them all.
This is the one that will come back to haunt us over and over if we do not call it out by name and lay plain its resounding lack of basis in fact.
It’s the lie they have been trying to sell for decades and failing (or at least having only moderate success and thus wreaking only moderate havoc).
It’s the one lie to rule them all. The one lie to rule us all. The truly big lie constituting a forest that has been lost for the trees and perversely therefore winds up being reinforced by the very debate about the little lies. And that lie is this:
Pandemics are dangerous to modern societies.
Because the fact is that they are not.
As was the case with the Spanish flu, perhaps the last truly high excess death global pandemic to bedevil humanity, much of the damage was done by horrible reactions. and the parallels may be more poignant than people realize.
One of the enduring causes of fear during the 1918 flu was the way that it seemed to be killing otherwise young and healthy people (especially soldiers) in a matter of days. They would be a bit, sick then suddenly die of massive organ failure and “wet hemorrhagic lungs.” The progression was incredibly fast, seemingly irreversible, and was stacking people who really ought to have been low risk in mortuaries like cordwood. This made risk, CFR, and IFR look horrifying and fear near universal.
If it could do this to a solider in his prime in a matter of days, every last one of us should be terrified.
But this is simply not a realistic outcome. In a modern society (even pre-antibiotics) it basically doesn’t happen. These are not the pre-sanitation/most people do not get enough calories days of the Black Death.
Diseases that kill at high percentages tend not to spread because killing the host is evolutionarily maladaptive. It’s like trying to conquer the world by burning down your own house and car. Even the really nasty historical killers like smallpox were only infecting ~400k people a year by the late 1800s and excursions above 1 death/year per 1,000 population during outbreaks were very rare not in spite of, but because the fatality rate was so high.
But respiratory diseases are different and tend to spread far more. Fatality rates are low. The claimed Spanish flu CFR was always suspicious in this regard. And there may be a reason:
There is actually quite a lot of convincing evidence that many of the “young, healthy deaths” in Spanish flu were iatrogenic. This is a word that’s going to come up a lot and a topic that’s going to be the big field of debate around covid going forward. It’s probably one of the most important scientific questions in the world right now. So let’s define it:
Loosely put, iatrogenic death is when the doctor kills you. And there is a long and unpleasant history on that one from Benjamin Rush bleeding George Washington to death to killing “witchy” cats to stop a plague carried by the fleas of the very rats they were eating to (and especially) new “wonder drugs” that are poorly understood but that rapidly go into widespread use.
And one of those drugs was aspirin.
Aspirin had just come into widespread availability in 1918 (and Bayer was rushing it to market for the pandemic). It was the new wowie-zowie drug and doctors (and especially militaries) all over the world fell in love with it. They prescribed it widely to those with Spanish flu. In doses ranging from 8 to 31 grams per day. Oopsie.
A typical aspirin today is 325mg and max dosing per day is ~4 grams.
A toxic dose is 200-300mg/kg of weight. That’s about 20g for a 180 pound person.
So 31g is “You’re going to die really, really fast and there is not a damn thing anyone can do to stop it once you take that dose.”
This is why incredible caution should be exercised around large departures from tested and true medical practice and new pharma modalities and products.
Stop me if any of this starts to sound familiar. (study HERE)
The unprecedented overall mortality and the mortality rate among young adults during the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic are incompletely understood. Deaths in the United States peaked with a sudden spike in October 1918. Later, Wade Hampton Frost [2] studied surveys of 8 US cities and found that, for every 1000 persons aged 25–29 years, ∼30% were infected with influenza virus, and 1% died of pneumonia or influenza. This 3% case-fatality rate has been called, “perhaps the most important unsolved mystery of the pandemic” [3, p 1022]
This case fatality rate has never looked even remotely plausible for flu. You simply do not get a respiratory disease like that in a modern (or possibly any) society, especially not in young, healthy people. It’s just not a thing.
But widespread poisoning by well-meaning medical professionals who have no idea how dangerous the products and procedures they are playing with is.
Official recommendations for aspirin were issued on 13 September 1918 by the US Surgeon General [64], who stated aspirin had been used in foreign countries “apparently with much success in the relief of symptoms” (p 13), on 26 September 1918 by the US Navy [29], and on 5 October 1918 by The Journal of the American Medical Association [31]. Recommendations often suggested dose regimens that predispose to toxicity as noted above. At the US Army camp with the highest mortality rate, doctors followed Osler’s treatment recommendations, which included aspirin [48], ordering 100,000 tablets [65]. Aspirin sales more than doubled between 1918 and 1920 [66].Again, anyone starting to pick up a bit of a rhyme in the history here?
The similarities to recent events are more than a little striking. (Bold mine)
Autopsy reports by pathologists of the day describe extremely wet, sometimes hemorrhagic lungs in early deaths. On 23 September 1918 at Camp Devens in Massachusetts, 12,604 soldiers had influenza, and 727 had pneumonia; after examining the lungs of a dead soldier, Colonel Welch concluded, “This must be some new kind of infection or plague” [48, p 190]. What struck E. R. Le Count [49], consulting pathologist to the US Public Health Service, as most unusual was the amount of lung tissue actually “pneumonic” seemed “too little in many cases to explain death by pneumonia.” He saw a thin, watery, bloody liquid in the lung tissue, “like the lungs of the drowned,”
And as ever, bigger hammer theory tends to rise to the fore and the terrible tenet of “it’s not working so do it harder” comes into play.
You have to hand it to Jackson, he found a way to make money and rode that horse into the sunset. He told companies they would be called racists if they didn’t pay off “protection/hush money” He further extorted them to hire some POC that weren’t necessarily the most qualified. Most bent the knee as it was easier to just pay off rather than have to fight his race racket.
Eventually, his tactics wore off and his fraud came to light, but it was an example for the woke to follow.
InBev who owns Anheuser-Busch just cut the throat of their Bud Light brand with the whole Trans debacle. They’ve lost $4 billion in value since March 31st and a whole lot of loyalty. Jack Daniels and Nike also played the Trans/woke card, to a lesser extent.
Why would they piss on their customers? It had to be a much worse penalty than just killing off brand/customer loyalty.
It was. It is the same racket that Jackson used with race that is being held against them.
WOKE RATING
Yes, their ESG score is being controlled and held over their heads. I’m pretty sure it was a tough decision to sacrifice billions and a lot of beer drinkers for “protection”. It’s the same thing that Jackson and the Mafia did. Pay or be destroyed.
Story:
Almost no one in America had ever heard of Dylan Mulvaney, a biological male pretending to be female before this year. Now he is suddenly all over the news.
The reason behind his sudden emergence is chilling. The New York Post exclusively revealed that The Human Rights Campaign, the forefront of the leftist LGBTQ mafia, is utilizing a social credit score to force companies like Nike and Anheuser-Busch to either advance their poisonous agenda.
These are precisely the tactics Chinese Communist Party (CCP) pulls with their citizens and companies when they say or do something contrary to the CCP’s mission.
In addition, the HRC publicly threatens organizations every year by sending a list of demands in person over what they want displayed in public. Clearly, Mulvaney was part of those marching orders.
The HRC is backed by hedge funds such as Blackrock and Vanguard, the top shareholders of most American publicly-traded corporations. Failure to advance the woke agenda would lead to these companies pulling their funds from Nike, Anheuser-Busch, and other major companies, leading to the loss of millions of dollars.
All of this means that major corporations actually lose more by not embracing the woke left than from angering conservatives. So much for the “get woke, go broke” slogan.
Executives at companies like Nike, Anheuser-Busch and Kate Spade, whose brand endorsements have turned controversial trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney into today’s woke “It girl,” aren’t just virtue signaling.
They’re handing out lucrative deals to what were once considered fringe celebrities because they have to — or risk failing an all-important social credit score that could make or break their businesses.
At stake is their Corporate Equality Index — or CEI — score, which is overseen by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ+ political lobbying group in the world.
HRC, which has received millions from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation among others, issues report cards for America’s biggest corporations via the CEI: awarding or subtracting points for how well companies adhere to what HRC calls its “rating criteria.”
The HRC lists five major rating criteria, each with its own lengthy subsets, for companies to gain — or lose — CEI points. The main categories are: “Workforce Protections,” “Inclusive Benefits,” “Supporting an Inclusive Culture,” “Corporate Social Responsibility and Responsible Citizenship.”
Credit: New York Post
A company can lose CEI points if it doesn’t fulfill HRC’s demand for “integration of intersectionality in professional development, skills-based or other training” or if it doesn’t use a “supplier diversity program with demonstrated effort to include certified LGBTQ+ suppliers.”
James Lindsay, a political podcaster who runs a site called New Discourses, told The Post that the Human Rights campaign administers the CEI ranking “like an extortion racket, like the Mafia.
It doesn’t just sit back passively either. HRC sends representatives to corporations every year telling them what kind of stuff they have to make visible at the company. They give them a list of demands and if they don’t follow through there’s a threat that you won’t keep your CEI score.” (extortion, just like Jessie)
As a result, some American CEOs are more concerned about pleasing BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street Bank — who are among the top shareholders of most American publicly-traded corporations (including Nike, Anheuser-Busch and Kate Spade) — than they are about irritating conservatives, numerous sources told The Post.
“The big fund managers like BlackRock all embrace this ESG orthodoxy in how they apply pressure to top corporate management teams and boards and they determine, in many cases, executive compensation and bonuses and who gets re-elected or re-appointed to boards,” entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, who is running for president as a Republican and authored “Woke Inc.: Inside America’s Social Justice Scam,” told The Post. “They can make it very difficult for you if you don’t abide by their agendas.”
In 2018, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, who oversees assets worth $8.6 trillion and has been called the “face of ESG,” wrote a now-infamous letter to CEOs titled “A Sense of Purpose” that pushed a “new model of governance” in line with ESG values.
There are two sets of rules, one for democrats and one for everyone else. Trump got charged with a felony that is a misdemeanor throughout history. Whether he cheated or not may never be known. We know that Billy the raper was a tremendous horn dog.
What makes it fun as Trump’s charges wer a payoff for sex as told by the press and the indictment. I wonder how Clinton is feeling other than knowing they are above the law.
As soon as I saw the Bud Light campaign with the tranny Dylan fake-a-girl as spokesperson, I had to ask who could be that out of touch with a customer base.
I was almost positive that it was from the Ivy League and most likely Harvard. I also figured it had to be a girl. No straight Bud Light drinking man would think a tranny would be a good idea. The final guess was it was a someone who was woke.
What gets me is what executive at Budwiser gave this the green light when it got to his/her desk? This had loser written all over it that any redneck in mid-America would instinctively know.
Here you go. Every guess I made was right, not that it was hard given what a FUBAR decision this was.
And there it is
Bud Light went woke & recently hired Alissa Heinerscheid, a Woke Ivy League grad, as the first woman to lead marketing for a major beer brand
She’s also now the 1st woman to destroy the largest beer brand in the industry
My already rock bottom opinion of Harvard was able to go lower.
I now await the case study or new textbook of colossal marketing mistakes along with Gillette trashing it’s male base and losing $8 Billion. I wonder which one will lose the most money and customers (and loyalty).
I give it a short bus as it is that bad of a mistake. It just confirms what I learned in the working world, that an Ivy League degree and especially Harvard are among the most overrated and overpriced mistakes parents make.
How tough can it be to sell beer, especially Bud? Get some guys, some trucks, animals (likely dogs) and good looking actual girls. Then film at the beach, a sporting event or concert. If you don’t want to spend the money on loser executives and advertising campaigns, cut the price a bit and you just got a bigger college customer base.
Go woke and go broke, every damn time.
Just to rub some salt into woke, the exec behind the Gillette ad was also a woke girl.
Carolyn Tastad, group president of P&G North America
And in her own words, how and why she killed the brand to be inclusive to a new generation. Like I said, she could have just given them a price break without chasing off the other 98% of her existing customers. You have to try really hard to be this bad. I wonder how proud Harvard is for teaching how to fail.
Whoever hired her made a bad decision.
Meet Alissa Heinerscheid, Bud Light’s VP of Marketing. She explains her strategy of using “inclusive” marketing to promote the brand to young people.
Hard to believe that the current administration and the lamestream media are pushing the socialist gun agenda and trans movement as a priority with so much else going on. Now, the trannies are shooting up everyone but no one calls for a gun ban when they shoot up the scene. They’ll never be happy. Hell, they aren’t happy with themselves given how much they are trying to become either male or female, because there are no other genders to transition to.
With all the talk of restricting guns, they should apply the same rule to everyone. Let’s look at that. Let’s also call hate crime what it is. The media fawned over the murderers this time instead of the victims. It is their narrative. I call BS.
Who should have guns?
This one is not just for the UK, but all of Europe who think they have some right to tell the USA how to live. We can mess it up without their help. They always want us to be like them, but forget we started a country to get away from what they wanted us to do.
They never get who the USA is and what we stood for when the nation was formed.
Mind your own business, or protect your citizens from the cultural enriching Muslims who are invading and ruining your countries. They are just sucking off your socialistic programs. If your citizens were armed, there would be less rapes and attacks.
We have a 2nd amendment to protect citizens from the government, and now from trannies. If you are mentally ill enough to think you aren’t what you were when born, those are the people who should be prevented from having a gun.
Delusions of Adequacy 