This morning, I debated what to write. There are, you see, a series of important stories in the news that merit comment.
The first story comes from the UK. The Telegraph is reporting that a panel of five eminent scientists is going to look into the reason why the worldwide surface temperature readings compiled by NOAA continue to show global warming while the other two major planetary temperature compilations which are done from satellite measurements show no warming. This difference has persisted for almost twenty years now. There have been a series of studies that have shown that the surface temperature readings for particular areas have been adjusted so that older figures are lower and current figures are higher than the raw data, but this will be the first worldwide study. No longer will we hear that a cold year in the USA is just a regional drop in a worldwide oven.
The study will undoubtedly take a long time to complete. If a pattern of adjustments to the surface data is discovered (as I expect it will), then the fraud of global warming will finally be unraveled. On the other hand, if the surface temperatures are verified, then a true conundrum will be presented: why would one method of measurement find warming while two others do not?
This is not just interesting science. Literally hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars ride on the outcome of this review. If it is uncovered that the warming figures on which so much activity is now based were manipulated to show warming that is much more severe than in reality, then all the remedies for climate change which politicians like president Obama are pushing will be shown to be unnecessary. Imagine, for example, that we suddenly learned that coal fired power plants are actually not a problem for the planet so long as they have scrubbers that remove the particulate emissions from their output. Instead of dying, the American coal industry could be reborn and millions would benefit from cheaper power.
A second story is that the FBI is investigating a threat of a terror attack by ISIS related forces in California or on the West Coast. The implication of an attack by those who Obama said were just a jayvee team would be both terrible and profound. America's policy of a lackadaisical response to ISIS would have to be ended. Of course, Obama's take on such an attack might be that we got hit because we did launch strikes against ISIS. He might pull out our forces and retreat. Hopefully that would not happen, but we will have to wait and see. Hopefully there will be no attack and we won't have to find out.
A third story is the report that Russian hackers (meaning employees of the Russian government) penetrated the White House and State Department email systems and read the unclassified correspondence of the president and many others. This cyber attack puts us on notice of the hostile intentions of Russian and its president Putin towards the USA (as if there were any doubt before this.) It also has a major importance for Hillary Clinton. It seems fairly safe to say that if the Russians hacked into the White House, they also made their way into the server for HDR22@Clintonemail.com which is the address used by Mrs. Clinton on her private system. In other words, Vladimir Putin has all those emails that have now been deleted and destroyed by the Clintons. Should Hillary ever win the White House, she will be facing in Putin and adversary with the means to blackmail her. If America takes positions that Putin does not like, he might leak emails that would destroy her credibility and her presidency.
And while we are talking about Hillary, there is the fourth story of note. It is a report about how the Clinton camp is unleashing an onslaught against what it calls the "baseless" claims being leveled against Hillary. I don't usually think of Hillary Clinton having much of a sense of humor, but her rolling out the old "vast right wing conspiracy" attack again is pretty funny. The rightwing conspiracy now included the New York Times and the Washington Post. Oh, and let's not forget Common Cause. There's no way to call that group rightwing.
The Clinton counterattack also says that there is not a "shred" of evidence of wrongdoing by the Clintons or their foundation. That too is hilarious. I won't repeat all of the evidence; that would take a book (it's called Clinton Cash). Let's limit ourselves to two undeniable facts: 1) After Reuters reviewed the tax returns for the foundation and found no mention of the foreign contributions which are at the center of much of this controversy, the Clinton Foundation has announced that it is amending at least five years of returns. That amendment will now include millions of dollars of foreign contributions which were required to be broken out on the return. It will also correct the over reporting of other contributions by an amount in excess of one hundred million dollars during the five years. That is not an allegation by anyone; it is a fact announced by Hillary's foundation itself. The explanation for the amendment is that the ones files earlier had "typographical errors" in them. Funny, isn't it, that these tax returns filed by major accounting firms that were no doubt paid enormous sums to prepare them, had such extraordinary typos. You can be sure that anyone else who claimed this sort of "typo" on his or her tax return would be in prison for tax evasion. 2) The second fact comes from the reconstruction of Haiti. After the earthquake in that nation in 2010, the Clintons and their foundation moved to the middle of the recovery efforts. The claim is that no company got any contracts in Haiti without approval by the Clintons. The claim is also that the Clintons used that control to get major cash from those who wanted contracts. There's a lot of evidence of this, but they are claims at this point, not proven facts. What is a fact, however, is this: as part of the reconstruction, Haiti decided to open itself up again to gold mining. The reconstruction committee which was headed by the Haitian leader and Bill Clinton made the decision that two permits for gold exploration would be granted. And who got those permits? There was a big demand for them since Haiti is known to have gold deposits. One of the two winners, however, had no experience in gold mining. All, it seems, that this company had was that Hillary's brother was in charge of the effort to get the permit and he had a major stake in the company. So, it is a fact that the Clintons directed an extremely valuable mining permit to Hillary's brother's company even though that company (and her brother) had no past experience in gold mining or mining of any sort.
The first story comes from the UK. The Telegraph is reporting that a panel of five eminent scientists is going to look into the reason why the worldwide surface temperature readings compiled by NOAA continue to show global warming while the other two major planetary temperature compilations which are done from satellite measurements show no warming. This difference has persisted for almost twenty years now. There have been a series of studies that have shown that the surface temperature readings for particular areas have been adjusted so that older figures are lower and current figures are higher than the raw data, but this will be the first worldwide study. No longer will we hear that a cold year in the USA is just a regional drop in a worldwide oven.
The study will undoubtedly take a long time to complete. If a pattern of adjustments to the surface data is discovered (as I expect it will), then the fraud of global warming will finally be unraveled. On the other hand, if the surface temperatures are verified, then a true conundrum will be presented: why would one method of measurement find warming while two others do not?
This is not just interesting science. Literally hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars ride on the outcome of this review. If it is uncovered that the warming figures on which so much activity is now based were manipulated to show warming that is much more severe than in reality, then all the remedies for climate change which politicians like president Obama are pushing will be shown to be unnecessary. Imagine, for example, that we suddenly learned that coal fired power plants are actually not a problem for the planet so long as they have scrubbers that remove the particulate emissions from their output. Instead of dying, the American coal industry could be reborn and millions would benefit from cheaper power.
A second story is that the FBI is investigating a threat of a terror attack by ISIS related forces in California or on the West Coast. The implication of an attack by those who Obama said were just a jayvee team would be both terrible and profound. America's policy of a lackadaisical response to ISIS would have to be ended. Of course, Obama's take on such an attack might be that we got hit because we did launch strikes against ISIS. He might pull out our forces and retreat. Hopefully that would not happen, but we will have to wait and see. Hopefully there will be no attack and we won't have to find out.
A third story is the report that Russian hackers (meaning employees of the Russian government) penetrated the White House and State Department email systems and read the unclassified correspondence of the president and many others. This cyber attack puts us on notice of the hostile intentions of Russian and its president Putin towards the USA (as if there were any doubt before this.) It also has a major importance for Hillary Clinton. It seems fairly safe to say that if the Russians hacked into the White House, they also made their way into the server for HDR22@Clintonemail.com which is the address used by Mrs. Clinton on her private system. In other words, Vladimir Putin has all those emails that have now been deleted and destroyed by the Clintons. Should Hillary ever win the White House, she will be facing in Putin and adversary with the means to blackmail her. If America takes positions that Putin does not like, he might leak emails that would destroy her credibility and her presidency.
And while we are talking about Hillary, there is the fourth story of note. It is a report about how the Clinton camp is unleashing an onslaught against what it calls the "baseless" claims being leveled against Hillary. I don't usually think of Hillary Clinton having much of a sense of humor, but her rolling out the old "vast right wing conspiracy" attack again is pretty funny. The rightwing conspiracy now included the New York Times and the Washington Post. Oh, and let's not forget Common Cause. There's no way to call that group rightwing.
The Clinton counterattack also says that there is not a "shred" of evidence of wrongdoing by the Clintons or their foundation. That too is hilarious. I won't repeat all of the evidence; that would take a book (it's called Clinton Cash). Let's limit ourselves to two undeniable facts: 1) After Reuters reviewed the tax returns for the foundation and found no mention of the foreign contributions which are at the center of much of this controversy, the Clinton Foundation has announced that it is amending at least five years of returns. That amendment will now include millions of dollars of foreign contributions which were required to be broken out on the return. It will also correct the over reporting of other contributions by an amount in excess of one hundred million dollars during the five years. That is not an allegation by anyone; it is a fact announced by Hillary's foundation itself. The explanation for the amendment is that the ones files earlier had "typographical errors" in them. Funny, isn't it, that these tax returns filed by major accounting firms that were no doubt paid enormous sums to prepare them, had such extraordinary typos. You can be sure that anyone else who claimed this sort of "typo" on his or her tax return would be in prison for tax evasion. 2) The second fact comes from the reconstruction of Haiti. After the earthquake in that nation in 2010, the Clintons and their foundation moved to the middle of the recovery efforts. The claim is that no company got any contracts in Haiti without approval by the Clintons. The claim is also that the Clintons used that control to get major cash from those who wanted contracts. There's a lot of evidence of this, but they are claims at this point, not proven facts. What is a fact, however, is this: as part of the reconstruction, Haiti decided to open itself up again to gold mining. The reconstruction committee which was headed by the Haitian leader and Bill Clinton made the decision that two permits for gold exploration would be granted. And who got those permits? There was a big demand for them since Haiti is known to have gold deposits. One of the two winners, however, had no experience in gold mining. All, it seems, that this company had was that Hillary's brother was in charge of the effort to get the permit and he had a major stake in the company. So, it is a fact that the Clintons directed an extremely valuable mining permit to Hillary's brother's company even though that company (and her brother) had no past experience in gold mining or mining of any sort.
No comments:
Post a Comment