Roundup

Coming soon to a country near you?  “Unprecedented” Threat to Parental Rights in Poland — the logical conclusion of the Nanny State.

According to the Polish Labor and Social Policy Ministry guidelines, psychological violence includes, “making the child ashamed, imposing one’s own opinions on the child, criticizing the child continually, controlling the child, restricting the child’s social contacts,” as well as “criticizing the child’s sexual behavior.”

Susan B. Anthony museum open — she was strongly pro-life.

Joe Biden’s raging hypocrisy — the policies they fought for years are working, so now they are taking credit for them.  To make it worse, he denies that he is being hypocritical.  Does he think no one will bring out the old videos to prove him wrong?  Or does he just think the MSM won’t?  Hint: It is the latter.

Socialist Global Warming Hoaxsters

Hey Professor Obama? Remember that Copenhagen Treaty you wanted to saddle American Taxpayers with for untold billions in restitution for Man-Made Global Warming? Well… meet Professor Philip Jones, head of the United Nation’s IPCC who has recently considered suicide:

According the below interview in the United Kingdom Professor Philip Jones admits there is no data which can be cited from which the infamous ‘Hockey Stick Graph’ was derived.

Professor Philip Jones further admitted (in addition to there being no evidential data that Global Warming occurred from 1995 to present) that new research suggests existing evidential data does not support claims of any man made global warming, ever. And, furthermore that it was hotter in 1000 BC than it is now.

Lets take a look at that article from The Daily Mail in the UK, shall we?

  • Data for vital ‘hockey stick graph’ has gone missing
  • There has been no global warming since 1995
  • Warming periods have happened before – but NOT due to man-made changes

Very likely to be coming soon to a country near you: Leaked Document: No Opt-Out for Children from Pro-Gay Classes in Ontario Schools

Public school children in Hamilton, Ontario will not be permitted to withdraw from classes that promote homosexuality, according to the Hamilton Mountain News. At the same time, according to a leaked document obtained by a local journalist, teachers are being instructed to tell parents who object to the curriculum that “this is not about parent rights.”

At the end of January, the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (HWDSB) hosted a professional development day dedicated to “equity” training, where they distributed a sheet to teachers with “quick responses” they can offer to parents who object to the school board’s “anti-homophobia” curriculum.

Another reason to home school and to ensure that home schooling stays legal.

0 thoughts on “Roundup”

  1. Glad you enjoyed it! I know a lot of bloggers see the same stories elsewhere, but I like to sum up some of the stories that the MSM will never tell you.

    Like

    1. I was thinking the same thing. Another story you don’t hear about in the MSM. We’re just a few years behind the rest of these countries if we aren’t careful.

      Like

      1. I think the real problem is the divorce and the sin of divorce. We are seeing the fallout from these parents’ sin. They made a covenant before God, broke that covenant and now all this is coming about. I know, it’s a mess and we should pray for the mother’s rights. But their sin has opened the door for the state to get involved.

        Like

  2. Yikes this was an insane roundup, oye! Some of the craziest things are coming out of Poland.. don’t they have the same rights for animals as they do people? I was thinking that was Poland for some reason.

    Like

  3. Regarding that “leaked document” from the Canadian school system promoting pro-homosex propaganda, they apparently aren’t against teaching blatant lies to kids against the will of the parents. Not about parents’ rights? That’s exactly what it’s about.

    Of course they run the same drivel about equating this behavior to skin color, “safe sex” info, diversity and other liberal crapola. They don’t know enough themselves, or they ignore the truth about the condition and what’s worse, their job is to teach students about math, science, history, etc, not perverse sexual lifestyles. How dare they (as well as schools in our own country) be so arrogant as to assume they can do this sort of thing with the children of other people? Crap like this really tests my Christian patience.

    Like

  4. Wow. Both of my teachers are just wrong about the controversial info. My public policy teacher insists that even though there is a dispute of data for the “hockey stick” graph, he maintains that there still enough “other” data to support it. During the weekend South Carolina had over 7 inches of snow. Global warming my booty. My feminist teacher thinks that Susan B. Anthony is pro-abortion. It is just a scary thing that if teachers are fooled by data then they put these values on upcoming students who keep believing these lies. This is a hot mess of a situation.

    Like

    1. Hi Mercedes,

      I doubt that your feminist teacher will be persuaded by facts about Susan B. Anthony, but she was explicity pro-life:

      Susan B. Anthony’s newspaper viewed women having abortions as a symptom of a lack of equality, not the proof of equality.

      She called abortion “child murder.”

      “When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged.”

      “[Is the woman] guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh! Thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!”

      Like

    2. During the weekend South Carolina had over 7 inches of snow.

      That’s pretty typical garbage from global warming deniers. Warming increases evaporation, and what goes up, must come down. Increases in snow are due to increases in precipitation in areas where the temperature is already well below freezing.

      You should listen to your teachers.

      Like

      1. The real garbage has been the lies from many scientists and organizations who put their agenda above the facts.

        Sent from my iPhone

        Like

      2. I just presented some scientific facts – that warming leeds to increases in precipitation, and therefore snow, in regions where the warming trends do not bring the temperature above freezing.

        Ignore the science if you wish. It sure wouldn’t be the first time.

        Like

      3. The AGW tautology is as pathetic as that of the evos. More snow = AGW? But if snowfall had been the same or less then would that have been evidence against it? Of course not. Why not record snows last year, and the year before?

        Hurricanes Katrina & Rita = AGW? But lack of hurricanes last year = ???

        Don’t be a tool.

        Like

      4. Snow= global warming
        No Snow= global warming
        Heat= global warming
        Cold= global warming
        Rain= global warming
        Drought= global warming
        Bugs= global warming
        No bugs= global warming
        Disease= global warming
        Lack of disease=global warming

        If you want absolute proof, here it is: This morning, it was 39, by noon, it got to 54…….eeeeeeek….its global warming…..Quick, raise my taxes.

        Like

      5. Don’t be such a poor loser. I’ve been on the right side of this topic from day 1. Every new revelation about the lies of these scientists proves that even more.

        I am on the side of science. You are the moral freak who denies the scientific fact that a new human being is created at conception. You use all your creative powers to rationalize away their “personhood” so you can justify their destruction. I’ll get my science lessons somewhere besides you.

        Sent from my iPhone

        Like

      6. The snowfall doesn’t mean anything. No one event means anything, yet as soon as it snows somewhere strange, you guys claim global warming must be false, yet at the same time, it’s 20 degrees warmer than this time last year in my city.

        Scientists predicted more snowfall as a result of global warming. That is a fact that you cannot deny. The fact that most deniers can’t understand that warming can mean more snow is not my problem, but it’s very well know to anyone who lives in a climate where snow is common. Do you know how much it snows in the coldest places in the world, like the Canadian North? Almost never. It’s a desert.

        Global warming is about overall temperatures, not snow accumulation.

        Like

      7. Ryan
        The sad reality is the the GW proponents are the deniers. because the science is being played out before us. Scientist A says there is GW. Now scientist B is showing that scientist A’s theory is wrong. The proper thing for scientist A to do is to accept that his theory is wrong and admit it. Yet, those of you who are religious about this issue refuse to accept the latest evidence, showing that there is no GW.

        Like

      8. Timothy speaks directly to the heart of the issue: “Yet, those of you who are religious about this issue”. This has become a faith to some people. Why?

        Because GW would give them leverage in the green initiative movement. And in the socialist agenda.

        Like

      9. Ryan writes that “Scientists predicted more snowfall as a result of global warming. That is a fact that you cannot deny.”

        Lets factcheck that, from the IPCC:

        “Future climate is expected to include more intense rainfall events (which would require more conservative water storage strategies to prevent flood damage), greater probability of water deficits (less hydroelectric production), and less precipitation falling as snow”

        Dooooooooh!!

        http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=306

        Like

      10. Great catch, Bret! You win commenter of the week. (Unfortunately, the prize for that honor is one of them-there-metaphorical ones where you just get to swell with pride and release some endorphins 😉 ).

        But even if Ryan had been right about a weather factoid I knew his underlying premises were false — that is, the application of that “fact.” It would in no way demonstrate that global warming was true. Areas which normally don’t get any snow were getting snow. And on and on.

        Like

      11. I will gladly exchange the prize of commenter of the week for some warmer weather, tri season starts soon and I need to get to training.

        PS Trying to get to Haiti in a few weeks, keep us in prayer please.

        Like

      12. the application of that “fact.” It would in no way demonstrate that global warming was true.

        I ALREADY SAID THAT!! When will you start reading? I said several times this does not prove anything.

        Like

      13. Sorry, you fail, but pat yourself on the back all you like. Less precipitation falling as snow is obvious with warmer temperatures, but more intense “rainfall” events in climates where the temperature is well below zero result in more snow.

        Is there not anyone here who lives in an area where it snows regularly? Ask anyone in one of those regions when it snows the most. It happens most often just below the freezing point.

        Like

      14. Which is it?

        “Scientists predicted more snowfall as a result of global warming” which you stated earlier OR,

        “Less precipitation falling as snow is obvious with warmer temperatures”

        Really, you’re a walking contradiction…quick, go to the ad hominem, its your only defense.

        Like

      15. We prefer ‘skeptics’ to ‘deniers’ because the science is never settled. Denying something that happened in history is seperate from disagreeing with an idea or conception. Snowfall is indicative of weather, a different subject than climate. It means nothing if it’s not a long-term pattern.

        Like

      16. Then count me as a skeptic as well, and you are right about snowfall, it’s not an indication of climate. I’m not the one who said it is. If you are a skeptic, then you will take Mercedes (and Fox News) to task for making the claim that all the East Coast snow proves global warming is false.

        The high correlation between evolution “skeptics” and climate “skeptics” and how this group seems to abandon their skepticism when it comes to the Bible is really all I need to know about them.

        Like

      17. I just googled climategate and wow there is a lot of information from all over the world and from small blogs to big news sites. Some pretty interesting stuff, especially what the scientists have to say about it. IM no scientist though so I can only get my info from scientists and too many disagree with each other and now because of the whole climategate fiasco Im actually surprised that there are still people that believe that we’re having this huge crisis of global warming. I agree that there are a lot of people that like to deny things just for the sake of denying, but it seems to be that everything points to lies about man made global warming. A cheap way of getting funding.

        Like

      18. Using “climategate” as your search term was your first mistake. It brought you to sites with a certain opinion. Go to a university or library. Talk to a scientist not on the payroll of an oil company.

        Like

      19. Ok nevermind Ryan, evidence means nothing to you. You are a troll which if I would have realized that I wouldn’t have responded.

        For everyone else that cares this is a pretty good article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html

        This cover up is old news now though and people are getting on with their lives. Thankfully people are looking at our environment more though and they are taking care of it better than they used to. At least something good came from the scare tactics.

        Like

      20. Too funny. You ignore the obvious: we aren’t any of those people. Why would we default to siding with them? And even more obvious: your premise that bias will affect science goes double for those whose living depends on the agw scam. Follow the money. Do I really have to spell that out?

        Sent from my iPhone

        Like

      21. Of course bias can affect science. Why is it that such a huge amount of the scientists that call global warming a “fraud” are paid by one specific industry? Or is that okay since they agree with you?

        The fact that I’m mocked as a troll for stating facts is telling. I told you why warming can cause snow, and all of you ignore it and resort to personal attacks. It’s really pathetic. If you have some science that says I’m wrong about the snow, I’m listening, but otherwise, grow up.

        Like

      22. I worked with a climatologist 3 years ago. He wasn’t on the payroll of an oil company, nor a university, nor a phony save-the-earth-but-really-all-we-want-is-your-tax-dollars company. He was a consultant that developed science curriculum for schools in Alberta and BC. He didn’t agree with the way data was gathered and analysed. Said it was all about modeling, and the climate is too chaotic for silicon based computing systems to model it. Basically argued there is no way to determine what the cause was other than the sun. Also didn’t think the earth was warming up much at all.

        Like

      23. BINGO. Computer models.

        Incidentally, I studied this subject for a class I had several years ago. The models that show the least amount of future warming also more closely model our past weather patterns, according to the recorded data. Guess what, those aren’t the models that “scientists” base their future predictions on. WHy? because little to no warming is not their end game.

        I wrote a paper on this, got an A. I should dig that up and post it at my blog……

        Like

      24. Ryan,

        You don’t sound like a sceptic of either evolution OR AGW.

        I don’t know that anyone’s saying some unusual snowfall automatically proves anything about AGW. The dig is that after hearing about warming, now that we’re seeing all this snow, the Gore-ites change the term to “climate change”. The real issue has always been over whether or not mankind is contributing in a dangerous manner to any climate change at all. And now we’re seeing more “sciency” guys recanting or exposed as liars and manipulators. Not much different with the arrogant condescension of evo believers, we have been scolded by the supposed experts and their non-discriminating disciples in the world.

        As for the temp in your city, big freakin’ deal. Record highs and lows are not news anywhere and I’ve been hearing of them my whole life. In the meantime, I’m still waiting for some AGW groupie to explain what is the ideal world temperature range, how bad it can get and still be OK. All we get is doom and gloom like the fear-mongers the lefties have always been.

        Like

      25. You don’t sound like a sceptic of either evolution OR AGW.

        Being a skeptic is not about ignoring facts. I’m skeptical about all things until they are proven. I’ll concede that AGW is not proven, at least to me, but it’s pretty close to proven in the minds of most scientists, and that’s good enough for me to believe that we should be careful with our world. The fact that the things that scientists “say” cause global warming seem pretty bad to me for many other reasons, so I’m happy reducing those things.

        after hearing about warming, now that we’re seeing all this snow, the Gore-ites change the term to “climate change”

        They did that to avoid the idiotic comments like “wow it’s snowing more, the world must be getting colder”. I explained above why that is BS. Sometimes you need to dumb things down for certain demographics who can’t seem to understand that warmer weather often brings snow.

        And now we’re seeing more “sciency” guys recanting or exposed as liars

        Seriously? How many have been exposed as liars? A couple of them have exaggerated things, if I remember correctly. Unethical, definitely, but it does not diminish the science of others when one scientist strives to match the data that the others have already collected.

        Record highs and lows are not news anywhere

        I think I just said that in a couple of different ways.

        what is the ideal world temperature

        The temperature that we evolved to live in, and the temperature that the food we eat evolved to grow in. We already know what happens when we eat food we did not adapt to consume. Yes, we can adapt to live in different temperatures, but no fast enough.

        Like

      26. “but it does not diminish the science of others when one scientist strives to match the data that the others have already collected.”

        Scientists that take over climate journals to block opposing viewpoints from being published? And more than a couple have recanted their beliefs. Nir Shariv comes to mind.

        Like

      27. Well said about comparing agw and macro-evo scientists, only you are proving our point, not yours. Thanks for the reminder that both use fake science and bad logic.

        Sent from my iPhone

        Like

      28. I do take Mercedes and Fox News to task for talking about weather and claiming climate. Heck, last year in the United Arab Emirates it snowed for the first time in recorded history. Global cooling? Maybe. The winters have been colder. But one snowfall means crap all.

        I don’t believe that all you need to know about someone is what issues they remain skeptical about. The AGW crowd has been proven to have a hidden agenda, working with made up stats and weatherstations that don’t exist (I’m sure you can find the stations in China that the IPCC has been citing…even though the IPCC doesn’t know where these stations are) and outright fabrications (Himilayan glacier melt, hockey stick graph, wildly inaccurate temperature predictions). The Bible makes the argument that God created the universe (but if you want to believe that the universe created itself, go ahead, although I’m shocked at the amount of irrationality it takes to hold this position), makes a historical argument for the resurrection of Jesus , and has accurately predicted events occuring hundreds of years into the future of the time of writing. The gospels have not been found to be a hoax, which is more than what I can say about AGW.

        Like

      29. Look, I am not claiming anything about the climate. All I am saying I don’t see the evidence of “global warming”.

        Like

      30. First of all you need to slow your roll homeboy. South Carolina has thick humidity and rarely we get snow like we did this past weekend. Also, we had the coldest winter temperatures in decades. Keep believing lies but I intend to be an independent thinker that follows the facts, not just take whatever is given in the classroom.

        Like

  5. “I like to sum up some of the stories that the MSM will never tell you”

    Like the Daily Mail, the second-biggest selling newspaper in the UK? Yeah, the MSM doesn’t go near it.

    I love the way you parrot news that confirms your prejudices rather than trying to think for yourself. Got any actual sources for the Poland story, apart from some words in quotes in a single article and a couple of comments from a single source? Of course not, and I bet you didn’t even spend a couple of minutes trying to check. You just lap it up, and it’s comic to watch.

    Like

    1. Hi Merkur — glad you’re a regular reader. Good sign for you. One great thing about blogs and the Internet is that I can determine over time who is dependable with their facts. If sites get too many things wrong I don’t refer to them. If they are right all the time or at least quick to correct things when wrong then I have a lot of confidence in them.

      Same thing with commenters. If commenters — say, like you — don’t have the most basic grasp of the correspondence view of truth then I don’t waste time with them. If they aren’t confident enough to submit that what they believe is really true, why should I listen? That’s not comic to watch, it is painful.

      Back to the filter.

      Like

  6. PS I am a scientist. My field of study is Theology, the mother of all sciences. Apart from a proper view of God and His creation, and you get GW advocates all the time. They refuse to see that God’s sovereign hand controls the weather, not man and our corruptions or corrections of our actions.

    Like

    1. The funniest thing to me is the argument that scientists that believe the evidence shows no human-induced warming are somehow on the dole of big oil, or other interests that would be hurt by global warming.

      Those same people will then argue that pro-GW stand nothing to gain from it and are acting altruistically. HOW NAIVE!! The people that believe in the hoax that is GW have a lot to gain from it. Algore is merely one example, almost all GW promoters have an agenda for pushing that flawed theory.

      Like

    2. PS I am a scientist. My field of study is Theology, the mother of all sciences.

      Tell me a bit about your experiments, detailing your test and control groups as well as your review process.

      Like

      1. Well, there is this place called Europe. The control group was a place called France, where we made Catholicism the majority. In England, the test subject, we allowed the Protestants to control it. England went on to rule 25% of the world, defeat the second best military genius of all time (happened to be French), bailed France out of 2 World Wars, invent the global financial system and the Rolls Royce. In France, you can get a Peugeot. As for countries with neither Catholic or Protestant majorities…well, there’s always Turkmenistan.

        Like

      2. In France, you can get a Peugeot.

        And some good wine, great cheese and bread, and superb climbing and mountaineering. Oh, and also rather rude and arrogant people who hate the English, but you can’t have everything.

        Like

      3. I’ve heard that if say pretend to be from Canada they’ll be nicer to you. I’ll be sure to buy a maple leaf shirt if i ever go there.

        Like

      4. Lol – I travelled a bit when I was younger and one thing that really stood out was that Canadians display their flag, mostly in badge form, more than anyone else, even the Aussies.

        I visited Canada last year, my first time ever in North America, and mentioned this to the folks I was staying with. The reason: “we don’t want to be mistaken for Americans!”

        Like

      5. “PS I am a scientist. My field of study is Theology, the mother of all sciences.”

        Good lord, I sincerely hope you’re trolling.

        Like

  7. Regarding the parental rights issue, I haven’t seen on your blog before any article or discussion on the treaty currently on the table at the UN (the Convention for the Rights of the Child) which every other member nation has now adopted except the United States. It basically puts the UN in charge of telling parents what they can and cannot do in the home.

    Based on how the United States handles treaties, if we sign on then the CRC would supercede the Constitution, i.e. the UN would have jurisdiction over federal and state laws in this country.

    There is a House and Senate bill that has been put forth by Michael Farris that would amend the Constitution to keep any such treaty from being adopted and spell out clearly in the Constitution the parents rights to make decisions in the home except in cases of neglect or abuse (which is how things currently work). The link is below and I urge anyone who has not researched the treaty, the amendment or the issue to give it a hard look.

    http://www.parentalrights.org

    Thanks

    Like

  8. I could go for a little of that “global warming” myself in Tulsa! It’s been mighty cold this winter. I’m ready for spring!

    Like

  9. South Carolina got more snow. This is the first time in the my lifetime that is has snowed for a second period of time in winter.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s