All errors should be reported to

Thursday, June 20, 2019

Media won't calm down

In Vanity Fair, Bess Levin wrote an over-the-top attempt to demonize our president, "Trump Deals Final Death Blow to the Planet." She couldn't make it through the first nine words without screwing up.

She wrote, "In the 476 months that he’s been in office..."

That would be nearly 40 years in office.

I thought maybe she meant weeks, but that would be nine years.

If they were days, that would be less than two years.

But that was the least of the problems in her piece.

Levin wrote, "In the 476 months that he’s been in office, Donald Trump has made it abundantly clear that he would like the earth to die in a fire — literally. In that time he has abandoned the Paris climate agreement; unveiled a proposal to freeze rules on planet-warming pollution from cars and trucks; claimed wind turbines aren’t a viable source of energy because the sound they make 'causes cancer'; and hired a guy who believes carbon dioxide has been demonized like 'Jews under Hitler' to discredit the findings of 13 federal agencies that increased levels of CO2 pose a national emergency. But it was only today that his pièce de résistance, when it comes to letting climate change really rip, was officially put into place."

At no time did President Donald John Trump say "he would like the earth to die in a fire — literally" or even figuratively.

Carbon dioxide is not "planet-warming pollution."

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is essential to existence of life on Planet Earth. Without carbon dioxide we die because it feeds the plants that feed the animals that we eat.

So no, carbon dioxide does not "pose a national emergency." I don't care how many federal agencies in Washington say it.

The media needs to stop being so foaming-mouth insane when it comes to President Trump because the constant stream of factless rants is driving them crazy, and driving their readers and viewers away.

President Trump's administration is in charge and changing things. Environmental Protection Agency chief Andrew Wheeler took on how his agency “the way it calculates the health risks of air pollution,” as the New York Times put it.

The problem for the EPA is that as we have scrubbed our air and water clean, the risks are smaller.

To keep funding going, the bureaucrats overstate the risks. Journalists go along.

Levin is all upset over 470 to 1,400 "premature deaths" over the next 10 years, in a nation of 320 million people.

Just what she meant by premature deaths is unclear. Most of us will likely view our own deaths as premature.

The problem for the media is that it set the volume for its rants against Donald Trump at 10 from the get go. There is no 11. Once you call a man Hitler, that is it. You have no higher insult.

In the Battle of Bunker Hill, American Colonel William Prescott ordered his men, "Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes."

The media should have taken his advice. Now they are all out of ammunition.


  1. Hmmm! 13 Federal agencies need have budget cuts.

  2. Professor Valentina Zharkova believes we need to worry more about freezing to death or starving since her studies indicate we are entering another Little Ice Age. We had the Little Ice Age (LIA) from the 14th to the mid-19th centuries. The Professor gave a presentation of her Climate and the Solar Magnetic Field hypothesis at the Global Warming Policy Foundation in October, 2018. Reportedly Zharkova was one of the few that correctly predicted solar cycle 24 would be weaker than cycle 23 — only 2 out of 150 models predicted this. Her models have run at a 93% accuracy and her findings suggest a Super Grand Solar Minimum is in the cards beginning in 2020 and running for 350-400 years.The last time we had a little ice age only two magnetic fields of the sun went out of phase. This time, all four magnetic fields are going out of phase. One hopes she is wrong because 7 billion people having enough food with a greatly reduced growing season is not something one would want to consider.

  3. "Levin is all upset over 470 to 1,400 'premature deaths' over the next 10 years, in a nation of 320 million people."

    Abortion is the very definition of "premature death." ='[.]'=

    1. Ray, you have committed a ThoughtCrime against The State (Alles Heil Sieg Heil). Room 101.

    2. extrapolating now, in the same 10 year period, 9 million plus children will be sacrificed to the screeching salivating god of abortion.

      I'm sure vanity fair will claim those deaths to be right on time.


  4. We are apparently, just 2 degrees C of sensible heat from the whole earth bursting into flames. I'm fairly certain, we'd see some smoldering by now.

    I think she shouldn't get her "science" from someone promoted at "The Science Guy"

  5. back in the late 80s or early 90s the usgs addressed the co2 " crisis."
    co2 is also integral to the calcium carbonate that makes up seashells, clams and any other sea life with a shell including various microscopic life forms. they theorized if such an excess existed, it would cause a bloom in the calcareous shells that are deposited on the ocean floor as the life forms die off in their life cycle and drift down like the "snow" you see in deep water movies. its always drifting down. that's what usually turns into limestone. since prevailing winds run west to east in the us, they did extensive sampling off the us east coast.
    they found no such build up at all to substantiate claims of excess levels of carbon emanating from the us. they theorized that the intense agricultural practices of the us, 2 and sometimes 3 crops in a year, might be using up and consuming any excess co2 as fast as it was produced. and to prove it was real science and not propaganda type hooey, they said more research was needed.
    that's key. no scientist ever claimed all the science was done no more questions.
    I've read A LOT of scientific papers, short, long, and in between.
    and they all have the same 4 magic words. MORE RESEARCH IS NEEDED.
    its the sign of real science, as opposed to picky choosy science once used by tobacco companies and now by climatistas. accept no substitutes. all scientists question the answers, their own or anyone else's. that's how science works. not by consensus. the consensus wanted to burn Galileo. the consensus thought attaching leeches to the sick would cure their bad blood. the consensus is what emerges from committees covering their butts.


  6. It's funny how these lefties don't use the phrase "global warming" any more, and every storm is now hyped up by their commie media.

  7. "Atmospheric carbon dioxide is essential to existence of life on Planet Earth. Without carbon dioxide we die because it feeds the plants that feed the animals that we eat."

    Boy, Donny, you must have had quite the ravenous appetite when you wrote this, and only this!!!

    Ummmmmmm....... 3 questions:

    1. What do we exhale that these other life forms inhale?

    2. What do these other life forms exhale that we, amongst many other similiarly designed life forms, inhale?

    3. What is the one, succinct, most easily and quickly proven neccessity, which, when impeded, of our form of body that can provide a clue to the answers to the above two questions?

    I presume you would not have missed this obvious were your belly to have been satisfied at the time you wrote this posting.

  8. Let me ask you a question. Has any prominent liberal ever claimed that nuclear waste would kill all life on the planet? I know they don't like the stuff, but I have never heard someone go that far. Now, as for global warming, you hear this stated constantly.

    So even by using lib-think one could readily conclude that more nuke waste would be a far better option than certain death.

    The fact that they refuse to change to nuclear power for 80 to 90 percent of electricity is all the proof you need to know that there is not a single liberal thought leader that seriously believes his/her own bullshit!

    It's a con game pure and simple. I am embarrassed that so many Americans buy it.

    Eric W.

  9. actually the number one producer of co2 on this planet, that produces more than all man, all his machines, and all other biologicals combined, is fungus.

    fungi and the plant world long ago evolved into a perfect partnership. fungI are the most incredible chemists ever. plants do photosynthesis to make sugars. water and co2 and sunshine. they produce lignin and cellulose as their structure. fungi break down lignin and cellulose into soluble chemicals that can be reabsorbed by plant roots. in return roots ooze a wee bit of sugars which the fungi can't make on its own. you can not break down cellulose and lignin without dispelling vast clouds of co2, the co2 the plant used to make the cellulose. it has got to go somewhere. and that co2 is sucked up by the plants growing in the mulch of decomposing plants it is an elegant relationship. if fungi didn't exist to do this, we would be 50 miles deep in bark chips.
    fungi is also proving quite exciting in the field of mycoremediation. mycology is the study of fungus and slime molds and such. the aggressiveness of some are what makes them so attractive. some fungi will ruthlessly strip phosphorus for its own usage from horrible organophosphate poisons, taking what it wants and leaving inert chemicals behind. we are talking the kind of poisons found at dugway proving grounds. a study was done, with controls and alternative methods. the fungi pile after 6 month was clean and inert.
    after Chernobyl, there were some incredibly bizarre radioactives covering miles and miles of forest and farms. and in spite of prohibitions, the peasants went out and gathered mushrooms which they cooked and ate as traditionally they always had.

    after which they promptly died.
    as one might expect.

    Soviet scientists went in, and discovered that the mycelium (the filaments that represent root structure) had basically touched upon every grain of soil gathering up the cesium and strontium and all the rest over miles of ground, and focused them into the fruiting bodies we call mushrooms.
    so they sent in technicians in lead suits gathered all the shrooms they could find into trucks and took them into the metal recycling plants. it was very lucky.
    for more like that I recommend Paul staMets book, mycelium running.
    absolutely fascinating. and the pictures are incredible as well.

    if I was still young and looking for a college path, mycology would be in the lead. imagine after research finding a fungus to eat a supremely obnoxious chemical, tweaking it enough, and getting a patent. better than any mousetrap.


  10. Once you call a man Hitler, that is it. You have no higher insult.

    That's what's wrong.

    Hitler killed maybe 14M.

    Tojo about 30M

    Stalin 53M

    Mao 66M.

    Dolf was a piker compared to the Commies.

    1. The Democrats use Hitler references as a dog whistle for the James Hodgkinson types among them. They are really saying this person is subhuman, non-human, should not exist when they compare someone to Hitler. It's hate speech, but they make the rules on that and everything else.

      The first one I saw use it on Trump was that little twerp Ken Burns who makes the cool documentaries for PBS. He said it during an interview while the Republican convention was on. Never knew that soft-spoken little guy could be so bloodthirsty.

      Eric W.

  11. Scientists took an Antarctica core sample that went back 400K years. Analyzing it they determined Temperature leads CO2, not the other way around. As temperatures rise, the ocean releases more CO2. It's also worth noting that commercial greenhouses have CO2 levels three or four times higher than normal. A segment put out by Curiosity Stream noted insects and other creatures were much bigger when the earth was hotter and there was more CO2 in the atmosphere.

  12. How do folks even READ that schlock!? LOL! Leftists are kooks.

  13. I just love when idiots like Levin compare Trump to Hitler because he pulled the US out of the Paris Accords. First, the Accords were voluntary and not mandatory and were agreed to by Obama without the will of the US people or ratified by the Senate as a Treaty.
    Moreover, the Accord were useless. The CO2 emissions limit were purely voluntary, and were not imposed on China or India, the two largest emission sources of CO2.
    But, what is the result Trump's revocation of the Accords? NOTHING! The US, despite its repudiation of the Accords is the ONLY major nation who has met the carbon emission reduction goals of the Accords! We did this mainly by massive replacement of coal with natural gas.
    So what is this Warmist whining about?