Reporting Renewable Energy Risks Paul Driessen

https://townhall.com/columnists/pauldriessen/2020/07/07/reporting-renewable-ener

Joe Biden has drifted far to the left and made it clear that, if elected president, he would restrict or ban fracking, pipelines, federal onshore and offshore drilling, and use of oil, coal and even natural gas. He’s selected Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as his climate and energy advisor and is expected to choose an equally “progressive” woman of color as his running mate (and president-in-reality).

He may also employ federal financial regulations to slow or strangle fossil fuel companies’ access to low-cost capital, further preventing them from producing oil, gas and coal. His official climate plan promises to require “public companies to disclose climate risks and the greenhouse gas emissions in their operations and supply chains.” By compelling them to present a litany of climate and weather risks supposedly caused or worsened by fossil fuel emissions, the rules could sharply reduce lender and investor interest in those fuels and hasten the transition to wind, solar, battery and biofuel technologies.

Those risks exist primarily in highly unlikely worst-case scenarios generated by computer models that reflect claims that manmade carbon dioxide has replaced the sun and other powerful natural forces that have always driven Earth’s climate (including multiple ice ages) and extreme weather. Actual data are often“homogenized” or otherwise manipulated to make the models appear more accurate than they are.

Models consistently predict average global temperatures0.5 degrees C (0.9 F) higher than measured. The12-year absence of Category 3-5US-landfalling hurricanes is consistently ignored, as are the absence of any increase in tropical cyclones, the unprecedented absence of any violent tornadoes in 2018 – and the fact that violent twisters were far fewer during the last 35 years than during the 35 years before that.

However, pressure group mob politics and the refusal of climate alarmists to discuss model failures and contradictory scientific evidence would likely make these realities irrelevant in a Biden administration. That would have devastating consequences for a US economy struggling to recover from Covid-19 and compete in a world where Asian, African and other countries are not going to stop using fossil fuels to improve living standards, while they mine the raw materials and manufacture the wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and biofuel equipment the USA would have to import under a Green New Deal (since no mining and virtually no manufacturing would be permitted or possible under Biden era regulations).

Lin-Manuel Miranda responds to critics calling to cancel ‘Hamilton’ By Zachary Kussin

https://nypost.com/2020/07/07/lin-manuel-miranda-responds-to-hamilton-criticism/

In the wake of recent Black Lives Matter protests, Lin-Manuel Miranda’s multi-Tony-winning “Hamilton” has fallen under scrutiny over its glorification of slave owners.

Miranda, 40, took to Twitter on Monday to respond to those critics.

This wave of criticism stems from the buzzy July 3 release of the show’s movie version on the streaming service Disney+, more than a year ahead of schedule, bringing with it a much wider audience.

On Sunday, Tracy Clayton — host of the Netflix podcast “Strong Black Legends” — tweeted that “ ’Hamilton’ the play and the movie were given to us in two different worlds & our willingness to interrogate things in this way feels like a clear sign of change.” In her thread, which earned 32,000 likes, she goes on to say that “ ’Hamilton’ is a flawed play about flawed people written by an imperfect person that gave my flawed and imperfect little life a big boost when i needed it most … but i do appreciate the change this illustrates & will be following the convo’s evolution.”

An environmentalist’s apology: ‘I was guilty of alarmism’ ‘I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public’ Michael Shellenberger

https://spectator.us/an-environmentalists-apology-i-was-guilty-of-alarmism/

This article was originally published on Forbes website, but subsequently taken down. It has been republished on The Spectator’s UK website. Read the UK version here. 

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening, it’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.

I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30, so I may seem like a strange person to be saying this.

But as an energy expert asked by the US Congress to provide objective expert testimony and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as an Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.

Here are some facts few people know:

Humans are not causing a ‘sixth mass extinction’
The Amazon is not ‘the lungs of the world’
Climate change is not definitively making natural disasters worse
Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have declined in Britain, Germany, and France from the mid-1970s
Netherlands is becoming richer, not poorer while adapting to life below sea level
We produce 25 per cent more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are potentially larger threats to species than climate change
Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
Preventing future pandemics requires more not less ‘industrial’ agriculture

CDC: COVID-19 Deaths Peaked in Mid-April; Down 86% by Week Ending June 20 Susan Jones, 

www.cnsnews.com/index.php/article/national/susan-jones/cdc-official-us-covid-death-count-has-plunged-88-mid-april

(Note: This story, originally published on July 7, was updated on July 8 to reflect the numbers reported by the CDC as of that date.)

The number of deaths involving COVID-19 in the United States peaked at 16,394 in the week ending on April 18, 2020, according to the provisional COVID-19 death counts published by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which is a part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

By the week ending on June 20, deaths involving COVID-19 had dropped to 2,287–a decline of 86 percent from the peak of 16,394.

WHERE ARE THE LIBERALS?

https://mailchi.mp/peaceandtolerance/when-did-the-left-first-go-woke-when-they-betrayed-black-slaves?e=c4e6370125

On this very day in 1997, Dr. Charles Jacobs, then the president of the American Anti-Slavery Group, an organization at the forefront of the war against modern-day black slavery in Africa, published a biting op-ed in The Boston Globe: “Where are the liberals?”

Back then, the world was slowly coming to grips with a stinging fact: that Arabs and Muslims own black men, women, and children as chattel property in Mauritania and Sudan — today.

The problem, however, was that all of the activist and media elements which one would think would jump to free modern-day black slaves — including the anti-apartheid coalition of the 1980s — simply weren’t there. Even worse, organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch — the people who had produced the original reports of slavery which alerted Dr. Jacobs and others to its horrors — simply refused to help.

Furthermore, so-called black “leaders” like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, world-famous figures with massive community and media clout, either directly rebuffed efforts to help tell the world, or backed off at the behest of actively hostile parties such as Louis Farrakhan (who preferred to blame the Jews).

Though a few brave and decent people in the mainstream media, such as at Dateline NBC and even The New York Times, did do their part in broadcasting the images and accounts of slavery, such instances of righteousness were few and far between — and today, are just about extinct.

Frederick Douglass would stand up for the Jefferson Memorial Jimmy  Sengenberger

www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/frederick-douglass-would-stand-up-for-the-jefferson-memorial

Lucian Truscott is the sixth-generation great-grandson of Thomas Jefferson. Truscott seems to think his family history (being a direct descendant of the author of the Declaration of Independence and the third U.S. president) gives him all credibility to call for the Jefferson Memorial to be removed.

Truscott contends “we don’t need” the monument. Monticello is enough because it emphasizes “his moral failings in full.” The Jefferson Memorial, by contrast, stands as a false “shrine to freedom.” And Truscott, as a descendant of Jefferson, clearly thinks he has full and unique authority to call for its removal.

What Truscott, writing in Monday’s New York Times, seems not to understand is that Jefferson and his memory do not belong to him and his family. He actually belongs to the United States. After all, Jefferson penned the words to what my radio colleague George Brauchler calls “the world’s greatest Dear John Letter.”

Indeed, the Declaration of Independence is essentially America’s breakup letter with the world’s most powerful empire, explaining why, try as we might, it’s really just not working anymore, and we can’t keep going like this. But the Declaration of Independence is much more than that. It is a profound statement of timeless and genuinely revolutionary principles of human liberty. For the first time in history, the ideas of “consent of the governed” and “unalienable rights” were proclaimed unequivocally.

Supreme Court Upholds Trump Exemptions to Obamacare Contraceptive Mandate . . . for Now By Andrew C. McCarthy

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/supreme-court-upholds-trump-exemptions-to-obamacare-contraceptive-mandate-for-now/

A victory for the Little Sisters of the Poor, but the case will drag on.

The Supreme Court has upheld the Trump administration’s exemptions to mandatory contraception coverage under Obamacare for employers with sincerely held objections. The ruling is welcome, particularly in its recognition that First Amendment religious liberty is not confined to identifiably religious organizations, such as churches, but to all Americans. Regrettably, however, the justices stopped short of a definitive ruling that would end the litigation, which the Little Sisters of the Poor have had to pursue for seven long years.

That explains the seemingly lopsided 7–2 decision in Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania. In his opinion for the Court, Justice Clarence Thomas concluded that the Trump administration had the authority under the Affordable Care Act (ACA or Obamacare) to issue the exemptions. Justice Thomas rejected the objecting states’ claims that the exemptions were not permitted under the ACA; and that, even if they were permitted, the administration had failed to comply with technical notice-and-commentary requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. (Interestingly, such technical APA flaws were Chief Justice John Roberts’s rationale for joining the Court’s four-justice left-wing bloc to invalidate the administration’s rescission of the Obama DACA decree — notwithstanding that the Obama administration had not complied with the APA in promulgating DACA.)

The Court’s ruling is fine as far as it goes. Nevertheless, Thomas reasoned that because the case could be decided based on the terms of the Obamacare statute itself, the Court need not reach the closely related question of whether the contraceptive mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2014), the Court had held that the contraceptive mandate unduly burdened the free exercise rights of closely held corporations with sincerely held religious objections.

Farrakhan’s Threats for Advocating Vaccinations by Alan M. Dershowitz

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16206/farrakhan-threats

For anyone who has followed Farrakhan’s hate-filled career — praising Hitler, calling Jews termites, calling Judaism a gutter religion, attacking gays — the content of any Farrakhan speech comes as no surprise.

Farrakhan — like Nazis and Communists — has a First Amendment right to tell his lies and spread his hate. But no media has an obligation to promote or disseminate his bigotry.

Nor does it demand silence from responsible Black and Muslim leaders, whose voices should be heard condemning Farrakhan’s devaluation of Jewish lives, gay lives, and the lives of people suffering from Covid-19.

Under the principles espoused in Brandenburg v Ohio and other leading cases, “advocacy” of violence is constitutionally protected but not “incitement ” to “Imminent lawless action.” The line between advocacy and incitement has not always been easy to draw.

In his July 4th hate-filled anti-American rant, Louis Farrakhan singled out this author for condemnation and threats for writing an article urging people to take a Covid-19 vaccine if a safe an effective one were developed.

The article also stated that mandatory vaccinations to prevent the spread of a highly contagious lethal disease was held constitutional by the Supreme Court and would likely be upheld by the current Court. This comment led Farrakhan to say the following:

“So Mr. Dershowitz, if you bring the vaccine and say you’re going to bring your army to force us to take it, once you try to force us, that’s a declaration of war on all of us. You only have this one life; fight like hell to keep it and fight like hell to destroy those whose heart and mind is to destroy you and take your life from you.”

A Conversation with Daniel Pipes by Gregoire Canlorbe

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16197/daniel-pipes-conversation

“Trump came to office with minimal knowledge of the outside world, just impressions and emotions. He also lacked a philosophy or a network…. Fortunately, some of Trump’s instincts are solid, for example, as concerns China, Iran, Israel, and Venezuela, and he does not get intimidated by the Establishment consensus.” — Daniel Pipes.

“Antisemitism long ago moved in the main from the Right to the Left; Jeremy Corbyn has no conservative counterpart. These days, mainstream conservative parties are more philosemitic than antisemitic. Leftists keep trying to turn conservatives like Victor Orbán into antisemites but that is silly.” — Daniel Pipes.

“But that improvement [of the position of Christians and Jews in the Muslim world] lasted only so long as the Europeans remained. When they left, the status of Jews and Christians fell far below what it had traditionally been. About 95% of Jews that lived in Muslim-majority countries have already fled; Christians are not far behind.” — Daniel Pipes.

Daniel Pipes is an American historian and president of the Middle East Forum. His writing focuses on Islamism, the Middle East, and U.S. foreign policy. His archive is at www.DanielPipes.org

Canlorbe: Do you expect the George Floyd protests to leave, in the American collective memory, a mark comparable to the September 11 attacks and the Vietnam War?

Pipes: The great question is: Will the current lurch to the left be temporary or permanent? I worry it is permanent because liberals are capitulating to progressives as never before. Will that trend continue or end? It is hard to forecast when very much in the moment.

Julie Kelly’s NeverTrump Exposé ‘Disloyal Opposition’ Hits Store Shelves Today By Debra Heine

https://amgreatness.com/2020/07/07/julie-kellys-nevertrump-expose-disloyal-opposition-hits-store-shelves-today/

Like no one else in conservative media, American Greatness author Julie Kelly has gleefully needled, mocked, and embarrassed the obnoxious NeverTrump movement in numerous articles and posts on Twitter. Most importantly, she has strived to expose them as the shameless and soulless grifters they are.

Her new book, Disloyal Opposition: How the NeverTrump Right Tried―And Failed―To Take Down the President, hits store shelves today, taking her one woman crusade against these “petty, vengeful, bombastic, reactionary, and abusive” fake conservatives to new heights.