Displaying posts published in

February 2019

The 1978-1997 warming trend is an artifact of instrumentation By S. Fred Singer

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/the_19781997_warming_trend_is_an_artifact_of_instrumentation.html

Now we tackle, using newly available data, what may have caused the fictitious temperature trend in the latter decades of the 20th century.

We first look at Ocean data. There was a great shift, after 1980, in the way Sea Surface Temperatures [SSTs] were measured; [REF. see Goretzki and Kennedy et al. JGR 2011 Fig. 2] “Sources of SST data:” Note the drastic changes between 1980 and 2000 as global floating drifter buoys geographic changes increasingly replaced opportunities for sampling SST with buckets.

Data taken from floating drifter buoys increased from zero to 60% between 1980 and 2000. But such buoys are heated directly by the sun with the unheated engine inlet water in lower ocean layers; this combination leads to a spurious rise in Sea Surface Temperature [SST] when the data are mixed together.

In merging them, we must note that buoy data are global, while bucket and inlet temperatures are (perforce) confined to (mostly commercial) shipping routes. Nor do we know the ocean depths that buckets sample; inlet depths depend on ship type and degree of loading.

Disentangling this mess requires data details that are not available. About all we might demonstrate, is the possibility of a distinct diurnal variation in the buoy temperatures.

Who’s Afraid of Socialism? The new Democratic agenda sure looks like government control over the means of production.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/whos-afraid-of-socialism-11549498364

Now that Donald Trump has criticized the “new calls to adopt socialism in this country,” Democrats and the media are already protesting that the socialist label doesn’t apply to them. But what are they afraid of—the label or their own ideas? The biggest political story of 2019 is that Democrats are embracing policies that include government control of ever-larger chunks of the private American economy.

Merriam-Webster defines socialism as “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.”

The U.S. may not be Venezuela, but consider the Democratic agenda that is emerging from Congress and the party’s presidential contenders. You decide if the proposals meet the definition of socialism.

• Medicare for All. Bernie Sanders’ plan, which has been endorsed by 16 other Senators, would replace all private health insurance in the U.S. with a federally administered single-payer health-care program. Government would decide what care to deliver, which drugs to pay for, and how much to pay doctors and hospitals. Private insurance would be banned.

Why Won’t the British Left Pick on Someone Else? by Denis MacEoin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13659/britain-labour-party-israel

Why are Labour members not speaking out loud about the need to boycott or overthrow such a regime as Iran, but instead focus all their venom on Israel, a country they demonize on wholly false grounds, especially considering the full IHRA definition of anti-Semitism which Labour has technically adopted — while reserving the right, however, to criticize Israel as an apartheid or Nazi state?

Whatever its faults, Israel is a utopia for human rights that many self-congratulatory moralists identify as their personal preserve. Israel is the only Middle Eastern country to uphold all the rights the Labour Party claims to hold precious. Yet, Israel is the only country in the world that the Labour party reserves for its censure, while other countries are ignored, mildly rebuked or even cosied up to.

In reality, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have largely governed their own people since 1994, following the signing of the Oslo Accords. The Palestinians, however, continue to go through inconceivable suffering due to the atrocious governance by their own often corrupt and manipulative leaders. They continue to blame Israel and the Jews — preferable, apparently, to blaming themselves.

“Victimization is the pain-orientated version of privilege. If it suffices to call oneself oppressed in order to be in the right, everyone will fight to occupy that slot.” — Pascal Bruckner, An Imaginary Racism: Islamophobia and Guilt.

The 2018 annual conference of Britain’s Labour Party proved that, however strong the criticism, and however embarrassing the scandal, there are many in England who will get on with their top priority: slandering and libelling one of the world’s most outstanding countries, Israel. At the same time, they seem never to tire of singing the praises of the Palestinians, regardless of the savagery with which they govern their own people.

Stirring the Pot By Marilyn Penn

http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/topic/politics/

Normally committed to a daily dose of Israel-bashing, the NYT outdid itself on Feb 6th with two front page articles in the News section and sourly in the Food Section. “Zaitoun: Recipes from the Palestinian Kitchen” by the Pakistani/Iranian author Yasmin Khan, offers recipes for roast chicken, cauliflower soup and spicy shrimp and tomato stew. Although these sound appetizing, the meat of the article is the opportunity to offer the following observation made about the West Bank when the author worked for War on Want, a British charity: “Seeing the physical apparatus of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank was very hard to witness.” We are told that in writing this book, she “made a point not to quote any Israeli sources..an absence that she hoped would send a message: Palestinian voices are not always heard. Listen.” Then, with unsated appetite, the Times journalist quotes Joudie Kalla, author of Palestine on a Plate: “If you look deep into the books, they are about keeping our heritage alive in a world that is so desperately trying to hide us away.”

Where to begin? In order of her comments, I assume that the apparatus Ms Khan refers to is either the wall or the security checkpoints that separate the West Bank from Israel proper. Both were instituted to deflect the numerous suicide bombers and terrorist activity levied against Israel since it acquired the West Bank in its self-defense against the Arab war of aggression in 1967. Without belaboring the long history of Arab refusal to accept a Jewish state, it is hard to believe that any sophisticated traveler would be more upset by the checkpoints in disputed territory than those at every major airport in today’s world. Ms Khan doesn’t mention that the standard of living for Palestinians on the West Bank is superior to that of their fellow countrymen in Gaza, Jordan or any other Arab country.

Are the US and Other Democracies in Trouble? by Judith Bergman

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13680/democracies-trouble

It is apparent that, over time, Jewish American Democrats will find themselves the voters and donors of a party that will initially seek to marginalize them, then ostracize them, and finally, demonize them.

With the last election cycle putting Islamists, who are openly hostile to Jews, in the House of Representatives, the Democratic Party has jettisoned even the pretense of repudiating their anti-Semites.

This transformation will be brought about by a group of new leaders who will have the means effectively to rebrand their emerging power base, either implicitly or explicitly, as the Neo-Islamic Democratic Party, thereby asserting a dominance that will make today’s political landscape unrecognizable.

It is more than painful, as anti-Semitic libels are whitewashed by the media or risk becoming part of the Congressional Record, to watch the American Jewish community being played by the political party that many have called “home.”

Are democracies in trouble?

As someone outside the world’s most powerful democracy, the United States, it is concerning to see how many countries in the West are being transformed. In Europe, free speech continues to be seriously eroded, churches are desecrated, and religious Europeans murdered.

There are signs that the same transformation is beginning in the United States, as well.

Trump’s Iran Terror Comments Draw Ire in Tehran A string of rhetorical attacks from Iranian officials against perceived U.S. aggression has preceded the 40th anniversary of the Iranian Revolution By Sune Engel Rasmussen

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-iran-terror-comments-draw-ire-in-tehran-11549456108

Iran hit back at President Trump’s State of the Union address in which he called Tehran the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, saying the U.S. has a history of backing brutal regimes in the Middle East.

“U.S. hostility has led it to support butchers & extremists, who’ve only brought ruin to our region,” Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif tweeted Wednesday.

Responding to Mr. Trump’s allegations that Iran has threatened genocide against the Jewish people, Mr. Zarif said that all Iranians, including Jewish compatriots, were commemorating 40 years of progress despite U.S. pressure.

The comments were the latest in a string of rhetorical attacks from Iranian officials using the 40th anniversary of the Iranian Revolution on Feb. 11 to attack the U.S. for perceived aggression and imperialism around the world.

The 1979 Iranian revolution, which toppled the authoritarian regime of the U.S.-backed shah, began four decades of hostility between Tehran and Washington. To the U.S., countering Iranian influence remains a primary objective of its presence in the Middle East.

In his State of the Union address, Mr. Trump also noted that his withdrawal last year from the multination nuclear pact with Iran and the subsequent imposition of sanctions were to ensure Tehran never acquired nuclear weapons.

“We will not avert our eyes from a regime that chants death to America and threatens genocide against the Jewish people,” Mr. Trump said during the address to U.S. lawmakers.

And in an interview with CBS on Sunday, Mr. Trump said he wanted to keep U.S. troops in Iraq, who are there to fight Islamic State, “because I want to be able to watch Iran.” CONTINUE AT SITE

Cory Booker….from October 2018

https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/09/bookers_stance_on_kavanaugh_leads_to_blowback.html

At age 15, Cory Booker once wrote, he tried to grope the breast of a girl who had given him “an overwhelming kiss” on New Year’s Eve. She pushed his hand away once, and then he succeeded on his second try. Nothing more ensued.

Booker, now a Democratic U.S. senator from New Jersey, wrote about the incident as a student at Stanford University in a column taking aim at the campus culture of men trying to get women to sleep with them.

“I had begun listening to the raw truth from men and women discussing rape about two years ago as a peer counselor,” Booker wrote. “The conversations were personal accounts, not rhetoric; they were real life, not dorm programing. It was a wake-up call — I will never be the same.”
Senator Cory Booker Accused of Sexual Assault by Gay Man

https://www.wibc.com/blogs/chicks-right/himtoo-senator-cory-booker-accused-sexual-assault-gay-man
Gay Man Says Booker Assaulted Him In Restroom

A gay man who identified himself as a liberal Democrat is accusing New Jersey Senator Cory Booker of sexually assaulting him in 2014.

The man, who wishes to remain anonymous, wrote a lengthy open letter that was posted on Twitter, in which he describes the assault that occurred in a bathroom following a meeting at his workplace, where the two met.

The letter “goes into excruciating detail,” according to PJ Media:

I stopped to use one of the building’s single-occupancy restrooms. Upon washing my hands prior to leaving, I hear knocking on the door. When it comes to these restrooms, it is customary to knock first in case someone is using it, even though there is an inner lock. When I opened the door, Mr. Booker was there. He smiled and very gregariously said, “Hey!” We engaged in some brief idle chitchat in the entryway and then he asked me to speak in private. What happened next, happened so fast that it was hard for me to comprehend what was going on. It was one of those surreal moments where what was happening was such a deviation and such a perversion of one’s natural daily routine that I hardly knew how to react. He pulled me into the bathroom, albeit not too forcefully, and slowly pushed me against the restroom wall. He said that “Being a hero was a serious turn-on.” He continued, “The Senate appreciates fine citizens like you. Especially this senator.” He then put his left hand on my groin, over my jeans, and began to rub. I seem to remember saying something like “What is happening?” It was a bit like having vertigo. He then used his other hand to grab my left hand with his right and pulled it over to touch him. At the same time, he disengaged from rubbing me and used his left hand to push me to my knees from my shoulder for what was clearly a move to have me perform oral sex on him. At that point, I pulled away quite violently and told him I had to go. I did not see him again before he left.

Democrats Love Diversity, Except When It Comes to Thought Their candidates work to extinguish any original ideas they might have held. By Jason L. Riley

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-love-diversity-except

The Democratic Party’s list of 2020 contenders grew by two last week when Sens. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker made their White House ambitions official. Liberals and the media are celebrating the “diversity” of the candidates thus far—which I suppose is something to cheer if your measure of diversity is skin deep.

Ms. Harris and Mr. Booker “identify as black,” to use the popular locution, and join a presidential field that already features candidates who identify as female, Hispanic and gay. Liberals tell us that they pine for the “postracial” society of Dr. King’s dreams, but their relentless focus on identity politics belies that claim. Sen. Elizabeth Warren took a blood test to try to prove Native American ancestry to advance her political career. She has finally apologized to tribal leaders, but the fact that other liberals are openly debating whether a candidate’s race or sex ought to be disqualifying goes a long way toward explaining Ms. Warren’s behavior.

Ms. Harris is the product of a Jamaican father and Indian mother, and her exotic heritage has become a point of fascination for the political press. On CNN the other night, Don Lemon explained to Chris Cuomo that Ms. Harris’s prospects might hinge on “the whole idea of how does she identify.” Mr. Lemon kindly educated viewers on the proper use of terms like “African-American,” “black” and “person of color,” and how certain Democratic voting blocs could be put off if Ms. Harris chooses one label instead of another. “Remember that whole thing with Obama, is he black enough?”

What’s really off-putting is a discussion focused on Ms. Harris’s biracial background instead of on her views, but there’s the rub. In 2019, the only things that truly distinguish the Democratic candidates are superficial characteristics. On any number of issues—single-payer health care, guaranteed jobs, free college—Ms. Harris and Mr. Booker dutifully toe the progressive line. The irony is that there was a time not too long ago when they weren’t afraid to express sensible opinions that were unpopular among fellow Democrats.

When Mr. Booker was elected mayor of Newark, N.J., in 2006, his defining issues were public safety and education. Mr. Booker “brought Giuliani-style ‘broken windows’ policing to New Jersey’s largest city,” wrote Steven Malanga in City Journal. The new mayor’s police director was a New York City Police Department veteran known for pursuing drug dealers. “I will be relentless in the enforcement of the law,” Mr. Booker said at the time. “My residents shouldn’t have to deal with drug dealing on their corners punctuated by violence.” CONTINUE AT SITE

Dear White People, Black People—And All People written by Chloé Valdary

https://quillette.com/2019/02/06/dear-white

When Netflix’s Dear White People made its debut in April, 2017, the show immediately impressed viewers with the complex emotional multitudes it contained—showing its characters to be what author Cheryl Strayed once described as “flawed, and capable of redemption.” The plot focuses closely on the inner lives of black students at Winchester University, a fictional, predominately white Ivy League school that originally was brought to life in a 2014 film of the same name. Creator Justin Simien, who also wrote and directed the film, demonstrates that there is always more to people than what meets the eye.

Coleandrea “Coco” Conners is a young woman who adds weave to her hair and shortens her name in order to become accepted into a Black sorority. Is this an affirmation of black pride or the upholding of European beauty standards? Or both—or neither? When confronted by another student about showing up to a party where white attendees wore blackface, Coco says, “This might come as a shock to you, but these people don’t give a fuck about no Harriet motherfucking Tubman. They pay millions of dollars on their lips, their tans, their asses, Jay-Z tickets, because they want to be like us. And they got to be for a night. I’m not about to go out in the streets and protest a fucking Halloween party.”

Reggie Greene is a fierce activist for his people, and is constantly challenging them to fight for their rights in the face of injustice. But does that mean every white person he encounters who disagrees with him on race issues is a racist? What if a white friend uses the N-word—but does so in reference to a popular rap song in which the word figures prominently?

Understanding Modern African Horrors by Way of the Indian Ocean Slave Trade written by Geoffrey Clarfield

https://quillette.com/2019/02/06/understanding

On January 15, and well into the morning of the next day, terrorists affiliated with the Somali Jihadi group Al Shabab forced their way into an upscale Nairobi hotel and business centre, killing 21 innocent civilians. Kenyan authorities, with some help from Western allies, killed some of the terrorists and captured the rest. Al Shabab justified the attack by denouncing the Kenyan government’s participation with African Union forces in Somalia, which has been in a state of civil warfare since the early 1990s.

I had driven by the targeted complex a couple of days before the attack, and once lived in this neighbourhood back when Kenya was my permanent home. On this visit to the country, I’ve noticed that—notwithstanding January’s terrible tragedy—tourism is booming, agriculture is bountiful and the Kenyan elite are benefiting from the massive Chinese investments that have transformed the landscape. The overall degree of improvement depends on which expert you believe. But the plethora of expensive cars that now jam the streets of Nairobi, and the building boom on display in many parts of the city, do suggest a surging economy.

Anyone who knows the history and tribal dynamics of East Africa and the Horn will understand that even if the Kenyan government pulled all its troops out of Somalia, Al Shabab likely would still try its best to destabilize this country. I outlined the reasons for this decades ago, when I first briefed visiting Canadian and U.S. military personnel here in Nairobi. Many of the things I told them remain as true now as they were then. That’s because the most important factors at play are rooted in history, not in recent geopolitical developments.

Specifically: Many modern problems in the area are rooted in the Indian Ocean slave trade—a scourge that was distinct from the better known slave trade that preyed on West Africa. In the eastern part of the continent, there was little to no European involvement. The practice was indigenous and ancient, and lasted more than a thousand years.