More Science “Fiction” Hot Mess

Cooking-the-thermometer The “Mainstream Media” is starting to recognize how the government agencies responsible for monitoring, analyzing,  and reporting on the temperatures from around the world have been “cooking the books” to show warming where none existed.

The Sunday paper from London’s UK Telegraph has this headline:


The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever

The article by Christopher Booker continues:

When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.

…Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.

…Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way “adjustments”

Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in “global warming”.


James Delingpole at Breitbart, recently wrote two similar articles


Delingpole discussed how Dave Burton – a US computer programmer, sea level specialist and IPCC expert reviewer on AR5 challenges NOAA’s claims that their temperature adjustments are minor, “a modest 3%”..

Burton’s assessment is that NOAA has actually increased temepratures by 35% which is  “quite massively distorting”.

Delingpole’s earlier article laments:


How can we believe in ‘global warming’ when the temperature records providing the ‘evidence’ for that warming cannot be trusted?

Suppose say, that for the last 100 years my family have been maintaining a weather station at the bottom of our garden, diligently recording the temperatures day by day, and that what these records show is this: that in the 1930s it was jolly hot – even hotter than in the 1980s; that since the 1940s it has been cooling.

What conclusions would you draw from this hard evidence?

Well the obvious one, I imagine, is that the dramatic Twentieth Century warming that people like Al Gore have been banging on about is a crock. At least according to this particular weather station it is.

Now how would you feel if you went and took these temperature records along to one of the world’s leading global warming experts – say Gavin Schmidt at NASA or Phil Jones at CRU or Michael Mann at Penn State – and they studied your records for a moment and said: “This isn’t right.” What if they then crossed out all your temperature measurements, did a few calculations on the back of an envelope, and scribbled in their amendments? And you studied those adjustments and you realised, to your astonishment, that the new, pretend temperature measurements told an entirely different story from the original, real temperature measurements: that where before your records showed a cooling since the 1940s they now showed a warming trend.

You’d be gobsmacked, would you not?

Where is Harvey’s Movie?..

Harvey WeinsteinFLASHBACK January 2014:

…”Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein said he and actress Meryl Streep are going to make a movie taking the NRA “head-on” and that the gun rights group “will wish they weren’t alive after he’s done with them.”

Harvey said to Howard Stern:…”  “I don’t think we need guns in this country. And I hate it.”

It has been over a year since Harvey announced his film to be called “The Senator’s Wife”..

Hey Harvey –  where is your movie?..

Bridge of Costly Sighs

Thanks to this informative article by Chalres Piller at the Sacramento Bee, we learn that while CalTrans has been rewarding contractors building the Bay Bridge for their shoddy work, others have sued the same contractors and received refunds for defective work:


…This is a tale of two projects.

One – the $6.5 billion San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge – is the largest public works project in state history. (More specifically, its $2 billion suspension-span segment.) The other – the $1.8 billion Greater Gabbard Offshore Wind Farm in the North Sea off Suffolk, England – is one of the world’s biggest wind-energy projects.


Both were built between 2008 and 2011 in the same Shanghai, China, factory complex. Each suffered from mistakes by inadequately trained Chinese welders. Thousands of welds in the towers for the 140 giant wind turbines cracked. Hundreds of welds in the Bay Bridge roadway cracked, too. Both were contracted and managed by Fluor Corp., an Irving, Texas-based construction firm – by itself for the wind farm, and in a joint venture with Corapolis, Pa.-based American Bridge Co. for the Bay Bridge.

Each required costly repairs. Who paid for the repairs and problems differed markedly.

After a dispute about who would pay for the problems, the wind farm partners won an arbitration judgment worth more than $400 million.

California officials did not get refunds. Feeling pressure to complete the long-delayed bridge, meant to endure a major quake, they paid more. They paid contractors $535 million extra, more than half of that to overcome delays and other problems related to welding. Then they lowered standards and approved a bridge riddled with cracks.

…. State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, outgoing chairman of the Transportation and Housing Committee, called state officials’ added payments, especially in light of their knowledge of the wind farm problems, “unbelievable.”

DeSaulnier, who was elected to Congress in November, said California officials “allowed themselves to be extorted – and didn’t do anything about it.”..

Read more about this outrage and the full story at the Sacramento Bee link here:

Christmas Lights to be Banned by the Gov’t!

Merry Christmas to all!

Enjoy those Holiday Lights and illuminated decorations while you can because the Grinchy Gov’t are trying to take them away.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) back in October 2014 formally proposed regulations to outlaw the Christmas lights.  WTF!!

Capital Christmas Tree

Why?? Oh Why?…  Because they are considered “dangerous”.

From the Washington Times: …

Federal regulators say “Bah, Humbug!” to Christmas lights

…In October they proposed new regulations to outlaw strings of bulbs, lighted lawn figures and similar items that would be declared as hazardous. The red tape deals with certifying wire sizes, fuses, and tensile strength of all “seasonal decorative lighting products.”

This includes Christmas tree lights, lighted wreaths, menorahs, outdoor strands, lawn figures of Jesus, Mary and Joseph, or Santa or Rudolph or Frosty the Snowman. Yes, Kwanzaa, too. CPSC is an equal opportunity Scrooge. The agency estimates that their proposed regulations will impact 100 million items per year with a market value of $500 million.

And this is because???

…“The safety commission says Christmas tree lights have killed 250 Americans over the past three decades.”…

The real reason perhaps is??…

…”CPSC would never admit it, but we’re free to speculate on the true motive: That this is part of the Obama administration’s effort to reduce our use of electricity, lest global warming set the Earth on fire.


250 deaths over 30 years.    Hmmm..  Priorities!!!…????   Those darn dangerous killer Christmas lights.  Let’s look at other dangers that need to be eradicated by our government: (Sarcasm = On)

Major Killer = The Toaster

It is estimated that over 700 people worldwide are killed each year as a result of toaster fires and electrocutions.

Next Up: bathtubs, buckets, bath seats, toilets, and landscaping features:   ….because…. according to the (CPSC) from 2006 to 2010, there were 684 incidents involving children younger than five-years-old. This figure includes 434 fatalities (an average of 87 per year), 233 injuries, and 17 incidents with no known injuries.

Still Looking for Harvey’s Anti-NRA Movie?…

Word on the street is that there is “not even a peep” about Harvey Weinstein’s promised anti-NRA film to star Meryl Streep.

Harvey Weinstein

From the “Word on the Streep” Blog that follows the activities of award winning actress Meryl Streep:

We’ve heard even less about The Senator’s Wife, a film Harvey Weinstein described as a “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-like take down of the NRA.”  Since he revealed his plans to make this movie (starring Meryl) on the Howard Stern Show in January, not even a peep of its possibilities.  Were it to happen, it seems like the kind of film Harvey would want to market during a presidential election year.  In this case, 2016 would be a great one, especially since we’re likely to have a strong female contender in the running.

Hollywood and the media made a big proclamation earlier this year (January 2014) when Harvey Weinstein revealed that he is planning on a film called “The Seanator’s Wife” aimed at criticizing the National Rifle Association.  Meryl Streep has signed on to play the starring role.

“We’re going to take this issue head-on, and they’re going to wish they weren’t alive after I’m done with them,” he told Howard Stern. “It’s going to be like crash and burn.”

He continued: “I never want to have a gun. I don’t think we need guns in this country, and I hate it, and I think the NRA is a disaster area.”

Is Harvey Weinstein waiting until 2016 to release this film to try to influence the election?..

The Innocence of Government

I was wondering about the hypocrisy of the U.S. Government saying how important it is that SONY release its “Interview”  movie about the assassination of the current North Korean President  “as a matter of free speech” ; whilst remembering how the movie “The Innocence of Muslims” was condemned by U.S. Officials –  leading to the arrest of the director in America and essentially shutting down the film.

I discovered blogger Anne Althouse’s post about this and am re-posting it here.  Well said Anne.

Hillary Clinton calls the movie about Kim Jong-un “disgusting and reprehensible.”

“The United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this movie. We absolutely reject its content and message. To us — to me personally — this movie is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose — to denigrate a revered world leader and to provoke rage…”

“The United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this movie. We absolutely reject its content and message. To us — to me personally — this movie is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose — to denigrate a revered world leader and to provoke rage…”

Oh… wait… that was that “Innocence of Muslims” movie about Muhammad that some sleazy guy made. Is he still in jail? This Kim Jong-un movie is a different matter. Free speech! Free speech! How dare the North Koreans object to “the fiery, slow-motion assassination of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, to the tune of Katy Perry’s ‘Firework'”!

We will make it less gory,” the [director Seth Rogen responded to Sony Pictures’ Amy Pascal who had some concerns]. “There are currently four burn marks on his face. We will take out three of them, leaving only one. We reduce the flaming hair by 50%.” In October, Rogen sent Pascal a follow-up message with the subject line “Kim Face Fix,” noting that “the entire secondary wave of head chunks” had been removed. A special-effects technician later weighed in with an update: “the goop from the head pop is darker, specifically to make it less flesh-like and more surreal.”

I’m all for free speech, myself. Even for corporations like Citizens United and Sony. But why is this movie deserving of high-level government support when “Innocence of Muslims” was treated like the garbage that — on an artistic/expressive level — it actually was? Let’s have some consistency! Do we love free speech and stand up to foreign bullies or don’t we? Pick one!
Remember, in 2012, the Obama Administration asked You Tube to take down the “anti Muslim video”…