U.S. Senator Edward John Markey of Massachusetts has served in both the House of Representatives and Senate since first being elected in 1976. That makes him one of the longest serving members of Congress. He is a member of the Democrat Party, serving as Massachusetts junior Senator since being sworn in in 2013 after a special election victory. He won reelection in 2014. Sen. Markey is up for election in 2020 and is being opposed by Republican Kevin O’Connor.
“Markey is a progressive who has focused on climate change and energy policy and was chair of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming from 2007 to 2011. Markey is the Senate author of the Green New Deal.” Source: Wikipedia
While in the House, Markey was the lead, along with Rep. Waxman, in promoting legislation including a call for the development of a “Cape & Trade” program for greenhouse gases. The Waxman – Markey bill passed Congress in the summer of 2009.
Sen. Markey has long criticized Republicans who have opposed the supposed science that has driven the UN’s IPCC initiatives and Congress’s plan to impose restrictive legislation. He continues to support legislation despite the fact that the science supporting his legislative proposals has lost all credibility.
While not foremost on people’s mind as we prepare to vote in the upcoming election, Climate Change has been an important topic for many. But there is much about the topic that isn’t well known. Understanding who have been key figures behind the concern and their contributions on the topic are important. And there may not be a more important figure than Prof. Michael Mann of Penn State University. So why is that?
Concerns about Earth’s changing climate started to surface in the 1970’s. By 1992 the UN was working on change. That year they held an environmental conference in Brazil. At the conclusion of the meeting they agreed to hold an additional meeting in 1997 which became known as the Kyoto Conference. The attendees adopted the Kyoto Protocols requiring many countries to restrict green house gas emissions (CO2 in particular). China and India were to be exempted from the requirements of the protocols.
The Kyoto Protocols were to be adopted by the major countries in the world, including the U.S. However, for the U.S. to become a signatory, the Senate needed to agree through a formal vote, since it was considered a treaty. All treaties entered into by the U.S. must be ratified by the Senate. That became a problem. In July 1997 the Senate passed the Bryd – Hagel Resolution by a 95-0 vote. One of the motivating factors was people’s uncertainty as to whether recent climate change was naturally occurring or caused by the increased use of fossil fuels beginning with the second Industrial Revolution.
The Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age are well documented in Art, Literature, History and Science so many people were skeptical of the new Hockey Stick Chart.
The controversy surrounding the Hockey Stick Chart heated up in November, 2009 (ten years after its release) when thousands of emails were released that showed a concerted effort to suppress any negative comments/publications regarding the new version of the climate history. This became known as “Climategate”. Following the release of the emails Prof. Mann’s work came under scrutiny and potential legal action. In an interview he took part in during the summer of 2010 Prof. Mann stated that he had always stated there were uncertainties with his chart and that it should never had been used for policy. But that’s exactly what Prof. Mann allowed it to be used for years when it was featured in the IPCC third report released in 2001.
Tim Ball Legal Suit
Climatologist Tim Ball went on record criticizing Prof. Mann and his Hockey Stick chart in an interview with the BBC saying that Prof. Mann should have been in the state pen rather than at Penn State. Prof. Mann sued Tim Ball for liable in a Canadian court asking for one million dollars. The case came down to two charts on recent climate history. Tim Ball’s showed both the MWP and LIA, while Michael Mann’s didn’t.
The case was dismissed in August 2019! Yet we’ve seen little reporting on what is one of the most significant rulings in recent years. Since then we’ve still seen many stories on Climate Change that are based on the early use of Prof. Mann’s bogus Hockey Stick Chart. And if you do a search in Wikipedia for Medieval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age you will see they are now using the Hockey Stick Chart in the articles. This was not the case just a couple years ago.
What Does This Mean
When you take Prof. Mann’s refusal to follow a court order to share the basis of his Hockey Stick chart with the court coupled with the Climategate email release in 2009 which showed a concerted effort to keep a real scientific discussion on recent climate history from taking place there is only one conclusion to draw. The claim that man’s use of fossil fuels is driving an alarming increase in current and future temperatures is fraudulent. The claim is based on political science, not natural science. Why hasn’t the biggest story of the last 30 years been covered by the media?
All I can say is shame on you for pushing this scientific hoax! That’s shame on the Chillicothe Gazette, on Gannett News, shame on Fox News, shame on the major media outlets, shame on universities and boards of education that teach our youth this hoax. And shame on all the major corporations that jumped on the band wagon because they figured out the hoax would allow them the chance to make huge profits!
Finally, shame on my alma, the University of Kansas, which gave me the basic educational background to know that the Hockey Stick and man-made global warming were a hoax, yet is now giving out “Climate Change Certificates” based on this very same political, not natural, science!
How would you fill in the blank? I’ve lived and traveled through much of the United States so I can think of any nouns to use in answering that question. Early in my life we lived ‘back east” and vacationed in Maine. So places like Pemaquid Point, with its picturesque lighthouse or quaint New Harbor with its lobster boats and seagulls come to mind. But I shouldn’t forget Acadia National Park on Mt. Desert Island.
While in high school, we took a four week vacation “out west” to the Rocky Mountains, the Tetons and Yellowstone. Each of those National Parks are full of natural wonders worthy of consideration. Yellowstone Falls certainly was beautiful as was the Keyboard of the Winds or looking across Jenny Lake to the magnificent peaks of the Tetons.
As an adult I’ve flown across some spectacular natural wonders. There is nothing like flying over the Grand Canyon as the sun is beginning to lower in the west. Not so long ago I was amazed at the beauty below me as we flew out of Portland, Oregon over mountains covered with snow. It was some of the prettiest abstract art I’ve ever seen!
A few years ago I went on a birding trip to the Big Bend area of Texas. It is desolate as can be, but even in its desolation I could see real beauty.
After having lived in Texas for fourteen years, I moved back to the Midwest with its corn and soybean fields as far as you could see. While some find those fields monotonous or boring, I found beauty in them. Much like looking across a corn field to the Stark Farm from Polk Hollow Road here in Ross County.
My first experience seeing what renewable energy looks like was on a trip my wife and I took to Palm Springs. One windy afternoon we drove outside of town and came across an expansive valley filled with wind turbines. As your eyes scanned the valley of motionless monoliths you could scantly make out the mountains beyond. That was my first experience with the “beauty” of renewable energy. But it wasn’t the last.
Trips to Chicago have taken me by other “farms” of motionless turbines standing high above soybean and corn fields. Occasionally, when I’m lucky and the wind is blowing at just the right velocity, I’ve actually seen the turbines rotating in monotonous circles. But you have to be lucky to catch that beautiful sight.
Trips to Odenton, Maryland have taken me by a solar farm. Partially hidden behind some trees, I was still able to make out the rows after rows of manmade steel and glass face up to the sky. It almost reminds me of the beauty in so many of the modern sculpture we see in our cities. (I can remember when they unveiled the Picasso in downtown Chicago. I still wonder is it really supposed to look like a baboon?)
Now we’re lucky as its more common to see wind turbines on hills and solar panels in fields as you drive through our countryside. But the beauty is just starting to spread. Soon wind turbines and solar panels will be everywhere as our nation strives to meet the goal of 100% renewable energy powered by wind and the sun. As an example, we recently read how a company is looking to locate 1,500 acres for a massive solar farm here in Ross County. How beautiful that will be?
One of my favorite things to do is to take a ride in Ross County’s rural landscape and take pictures of aged barns. Many of them are in semi disrepair, but there is still beauty in them. I’m looking forward to doing the same a decade or two from now with rusting wind turbines and solar panels as the subject for my photos. Those will be pictures to treasure, won’t they?
“O beautiful for spacious skies, For amber waves of grain, For purple mountain majesties Above the fruited plain! America! America! God shed His grace on thee And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea!“
I imagine the 2021 version will go something like this:
“O beautiful for spacious skies, For massive solar farms For towering wind turbine majesties Above the fruited plain! America! America! Man spread his works on thee And filled thy land with signs of renewable energy From sea to shining sea!“
The cartoon portrays Sen. Mitch McConnell riding an elephant towards the Supreme Court Hearings. Behind the elephant a little fly says “Give the People a Voice in the filling of this vacancy.” This is reported to reflect the dying wish of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The obvious question is “Which People?”.
In 2016 President Trump achieved an Electoral College victory and became our President. He was elected to serve FOUR years. That four year term ends in January 2021. In 2018 Republicans gained seats in the US Senate, maintaining a majority. So during the last two elections voters elected a president and a Senate controlled by Republicans. Most observers believe that Trump’s promise to nominate and Republican Senators’ promise to confirm conservative justices to the Supreme Court were major factors in those victories.
But now Democrats want Trump and the Senate to deprive those voters of the victories they gained? They believe “The People” are those who will vote in the upcoming elections. Of course the results of those elections won’t be known for some time.
But “The people” have already had a voice in filling of the vacancy! They elected President Trump and a Republican majority in the Senate.
It sure looks like Democrats want to deny them that voice.
Each Chillicothe Gazette Opinion page includes the following in the heading:
“The First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.”
While the Constitution only address these rights as they apply to the Federal Government, they typically are thought to be rights that apply regarding local and state governments too. So it is interesting that USA Today would make the following statements in their opinion piece:
“… the banning of large indoor gatherings are not assaults on freedom, …”
“Those who flout restrictions on gatherings – for … worship services, political rallies or anything else – are only putting themselves and others at risk.”
It is hard to see how putting in place banning large indoor gatherings isn’t denying the right of people to peacefully assemble. And restriction on worship services is certainly prohibiting the free exercise of religion. So how does USA Today not see them as assaults on freedom guaranteed in the First Amendment?
If state and local governments are allowed to assault those basic first amendment rights, does that mean a state or local government can restrict what the Chillicothe Gazette or USA Today can print in its newspaper? Or if they were to find what is in their papers to be alarming or threatening, can they ban the Chillicothe or USA Today from publishing their paper in the government’s domain? I expect that USA Today would see that as a major violation of the their first amendment rights.
Why can’t they see that restricting worship services and the right to assemble in whatever number people chose aren’t also first amendment rights violations?
I suspect it has more to do with politics than principles!
This posting will be the first of two I’ll be writing related to this USA Today opinion piece printed in the Gazette. As you might suspect, it will be covering questions the “200,000 souls” might be asking that weren’t covered.
“Why were Covid-19 positive patients sent to our nursing home?”:
Five states in particular, including New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and California are reported to have required nursing homes to accept patients that were suspected of having or had tested positive for the Covid-19 virus. In New York’s case, the governor still required nursing homes to accept them, even after the nursing home industry objected saying they weren’t able to properly handle those patients and protect their resident’s safety. At least four of those states had a high percentage of their Covid-19 deaths from nursing homes. Many of those deaths occurred in the nursing homes, but others were transferred to hospitals where they died. So the exact number who died from these directives is unknown. Inquiries have been opened up to look into this issue. I suspect that at least some of those who died in nursing homes in those states might be asking “Would I still be alive if Covid-19 positive patients hadn’t been admitted to my nursing home?” Answering questions arising from this might give us insight into the motivation, but it will do little to ease the minds of those souls who died as a result.
“Why wasn’t I treated with a Hydroxychloride regiment?”
USA Today states “Much of the blame lies at the hands of an astonishingly incompetent and politically motivated Trump administration…”. They then go on to blame many in the public “…manipulated by news organizations that profit from reinforcing people’s ill-informed opinions.” How true that statement is. But I suspect USA Today wasn’t commenting on their reporting. But maybe it is a case of “the Pot calling the kettle a very dark shade of gray“?
Note: In 1983 a prospective payment system was introduced into the Medicare program. Prior to that hospitals were reimbursed “cost” of caring for Medicare patients as determined by an annual cost report. A key component of the new program was the implementation of much tougher hospital admission criteria. This resulted in sicker patients remaining in nursing homes. However nursing homes weren’t necessarily prepared to keep those patients or properly reimbursed in order to increase the level of care available in their facilities. This has been an ongoing issue ever since.
At a time when it looks like many of the scare tactics that the Gazette and Gannett News are no longer working, The USA Today Editorial Board went back to the tried and true “Man-made Climate Change” hoax. Here are a few of the things they say in their opinion piece:
“A feverish planet is telling voters it will not be ignored.”
“Massive Antarctic glaciers are breaking free as temperatures rise, threatening over time to raise sea levels 10 feet.”
“Actually, the science does know. Measurable rates of heat-trapping carbon dioxide are at level the world hasn’t seen in 800,000 years,…”
“… Global temperatures have risen significantly since the dawn of the industrial revolution.”
“But if …. melting glaciers carry any message, it’s that time is running out in the battle against climate change.”
So let’s take their concerns and facts one at a time:
Rising Sea Levels: What do the following have in common:
Both were exposed during the Wisconsin Glaciation and are now under water. In an article on the Bering Land Bridge the author, Bryan Fagan, notes that “…approximately 20,000 years ago, when global sea levels were hundreds of feet below today’s levels…” It’s well accepted science that as the glaciers of the Wisconsin Glaciation melted they released massive amounts of water into the oceans and we had “rising sea levels”. In fact they have already risen “hundreds of feet”. (Nearly 400 feet.) The “projected” additional 10 ft. of rising sea level quoted in the opinion piece may have a significant impact on coastal cities, islands and beaches, but it is small in comparison with the sea level rise the Earth experienced long before the Industrial Revolution. So why is the editorial board so certain the Industrial Revolution will be to blame if the additional rise occurs.
Historic CO2 Levels:
According to science (biology) CO2 is an essential gas for life on Earth. Without CO2 in the atmosphere most, if not all, plants can’t exist. And without plants to take in CO2 and to give off oxygen, most animals can’t exist. Plants are also an essential food source for many animals. With higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere for plants to take in, Earth greens (has more plant life). According to a study by NASA Earth has been greening the last 40 years. So if CO2 is essential to existence of life and a greener Earth is a good thing, then aren’t higher levels of CO2 actually beneficial? Won’t a greener Earth use more CO2 and produce more oxygen?
But the editorial board didn’t argue that. They stated as fact that we are experiencing the highest levels of CO2 in the last 800,000 years. The level is now estimated to be around 410 PPM.
In SEPP’s September 12, 2020 issue Ken Haappala talks about the greenhouse impact of various gases. In particular he addresses CO2.
“As the concentration of a gas increases, its ability to cause a change in temperature diminishes; this is called “saturation,” and it is accurate as well as convenient to represent the change by a logarithmic curve. In the case of CO2, its importance begins to decline even below 100 parts per million (ppm), and at 400 ppm the influence of carbon dioxide (CO2) is close to full saturation. – having little effect. Thus, enormous increases in CO2 are needed to have even a minor influence on temperature.”
Science has been testing the absorption rates of various greenhouse gases. His statement reflects science’s findings. So if he is correct, the fact we are now at the highest level of CO2 in the last 800,000 years may not have much importance. And higher levels in the future may not result in much of an increase in temperature, but could help green the planet even more.
According to articles on the Industrial Revolution, it began in England with the mechanization of the textile industry. The shuttle loom changed the production of textiles, especially cotton. Eli Whitney’s cotton gin was another major factor in not only allowing for the mass production of cotton textiles, but also for the development of the New England textile industry. Massive textile mills were built alongside New England’s many rivers and were powered by harnessing the rivers renewal water power. A second “Industrial Revolution” took place after the American Civil War with the use of oil and the development of the combustion engine. Manufacturing was no longer limited by access to water power.
Long accepted by science is a period known as The Little Ice Age. This was a bleak period in history. It is estimated to have lasted from the 1300’s to the mid 1800’s. While not a full blown ice age, it was a cold period that included increasing glaciers in the Alps and other areas. The Little Ice Age followed a warm period known as the Medieval Warm Period or Anomaly. Both are well documented in art, literature, history and science.
So did the Industrial Revolution introduce warming or was the warming that has occurred over the last 170 years been part of a naturally occurring warming cycle that started 22,000 years ago? Either way, it appears it has been beneficial, not destructive.
Melting Glaciers’ message that “time is running out”:
If you look at enough papers, you are bound to come across an article about melting glaciers. The last one I saw related to the melting of Greenland’s glaciers. So when did the melting start?
To get a clear picture, one must start with when did glaciers stop expanding. The last major glacial expansion in North America is known as the Wisconsin Glaciation. The Wisconsin Glaciation didn’t impact just what is now known as the state of Wisconsin, but impacted every New England and Midwest state.
Ohio is no exception. The glacier extended as far south as what is now Western Ave. in Chillicothe and covered two thirds of the state’s land mass. It is estiamted to have reached its maximum extent as recently as 18,000 to 22,000 years ago. By the time of the Industrial Revolution that huge sheet of ice could no longer be found in the United States or Canada. A few remnants could still be found in Greenland. While the estimated times for maximum expansion and retreating vary somewhat, the fact we’ve seen the advance and retreat of massive sheets of ice multiple times in the last 600,000 years is indisputable.
So if the melting glaciers are telling us that time is running out to fight climate change the time for humans to have acted would have been 20,000 or so years ago. But of course, humans weren’t impacting the climate back when the glaciers started melting or by the time the were mostly gone. So why are we so certain the recent minor increase in temperature and glacial melting we’ve experienced since the end of The Little Ice Age are due to the use of fossil fuels?
There is a source with a series of graphs of all three components: temperature fluctuation, CO2 levels and sea level fluctuation over the last 420,000 years. After viewing these graphs one can only concluded that Earth’s climate changes “regularly” and what we are now experiencing may not be out of the ordinary after all. We can also conclude that Earth will go through another major cooling and warming cycle sometime in the future.
The editorial board of USA Today might want to be careful about entering the debate on Climate Change. Their recent “opinion” piece sounds more like political science rather than natural science!
By The Columbus Dispatch, Dick Polman & Political Cartoon
Today’s issue of the Chillicothe Gazette has an Opinion page full of Covid-19 items. At the top of the page there is a “Guest Editorial” by The Columbus Dispatch. It compliments The Ohio State University’s decision to eliminate next spring break. (Seeing it is only the end of September, why did they need to make that decision now?) On the left hand side of the page is a column by Dick Polman. He does his Trump bashing in his normal dishonest and inflammatory way of writing. (And he is the University of Pennsylvania’s Writer in Residence, though for some reason they left that off his byline this time?) In the center of the page there is a cartoon depicting a Lake of the Ozark biker event as “Superspreader 2020”.
After seeing this I couldn’t help but wonder: “Does the Chillicothe Gazette’s editor choose the columns and cartoons, or is she assigned the ones to use in the paper?” and “Who comes up with the headings for the columns?”
While taking all of the items together, along with a front page story on the number of cases in Ross County, it appears the Editor of the Gazette is still concerned that readers aren’t taking the virus seriously enough and attaching enough blame to President Trump.
It looks like Dick Polman sums up the pinion of the Chillicothe Gazette’s best with his closing words:
“I’ll simply pose a rhetorical question: If any president, through ignorance and negligence, had allowed terrorists to kill 200,000 Americans – with the prospect of killing many more, and wounding still more life, would that manifestly failed individual have a prayer of getting re-elected?”
The obvious answer that Dick was looking for was “Of course not!” And it appears he thinks he has just convinced us to vote for VP Biden.
Dick might ask himself “Why doesn’t it seem to be working?”
Maybe it isn’t working because many voters understand:
The real culprit is the Chinese Communist Party. They allowed the virus to spread throughout the world.
President Trump actually put in place travel bans together with a task force designed to address many of the items needed to fight the virus.
Trump didn’t make governors of five northeastern states require nursing homes to accept Covid-19 patients resulting in tens of thousands of deaths.
Trump didn’t “outlaw” the use of hydrozycloride as a potential life saving treatment for Covid-19 patients after many doctors found it to be very helpful in fighting the disease.
Trump’s task force has sped up the development of a Covid-19 vaccine.
Diseases can be deadly as over 2.8 million people die each year in the United States.
It sure seems like the Gazette and Gannett think Covid-19 is a key to defeating President Trump in the upcoming election and are doing whatever they can to make sure it makes a difference!
By Darrel Rowland Lancaster Eagle-Gazette and photo by Joshua Bickel of the Dispatch
With the subtitle of the article reflecting that most at the Trump rally were “maskless” it is ironic that three of the four men pictured standing behind Trump were wearing masks and the one that wasn’t, had his mask pulled down at the time the photograph was taken.
Of course, they could have been the only four to have masks?
By Darrel Rowland of the Lancaster Eagle – Gazette
With a bold headline like the above, what would you expect the beginning of the article to be about? If you said the Covid-19 Virus you would be wrong. In fact you have to go to the fourth paragraph of page 3A to find the quote shown above. The story is really about the two campaign stops President Trump made in Ohio the day before.
Once the article catches up with the headline you find the following:
“Despite the findings of scientists and medical experts, Trump claimed the young and the fit are virtually exempt from the disease. ‘Now we know it affects elderly people. Elderly people with heart problems and other problems. If they have other problems, that’s what it really affects.’ Trump’s response to the coronavirus remains a major campaign issue…”
Watching Fox News I recently heard about the CDC’s latest infection fatality rate estimates and they were quite startling.
What really surprised me was how hard it was to find this information. The only news source that came up when I did a Google search was an article on “Wink”. And even the CDC site didn’t have an article posted, you had to search down a planning document to find the numbers. Why wasn’t this covered by all the major media outlets and even the Gazette?
Based on the statistics listed on the Ross County Health District’s website (9/25/2020) and an estimated population of 76,600, 11 out of every 1,000 residents have been infected. But that overstates the risk for people who aren’t: Inmates, Correction Employees, Nursing Home Residents and Healthcare workers. Exclude cases involving those categories of residents and the number drops to 6 out of 1,000. With only 23 deaths, many of whom were nursing home residents and inmates, the expected deaths per 1,000 residents is 0!
So was it really that outrageous that President Trump said the Virus “affects virtually nobody”. For those under the age of 70 there is very little chance of dying from the Covid-19 virus. What has made the statement “outrageous” isn’t the death rate, but government’s reaction to the virus. Federal and state governments’ reactions have impacted nearly everyone!
“Trump’s response to the coronavirus remains a major campaign issue…” Who’s making it an issue? Isn’t it the Democrats and the media. However, it appears that most in the media are only reporting one side. They are reporting what President Trump says, but not what VP Biden and Sen. Harris say.
In her speech given the afternoon of the last day of the RVC’s convention Sen. Harris harshly criticized President Trump. One of the areas she went after him hardest on was the Covid-19 virus. (Watch starting at 10 minutes to 13 or 14 minutes of above linked video.) She claimed that President Trump didn’t have and still doesn’t have a plan to address the virus.
How did that go unchallenged by the Gazette and the media? Day after day, for at least a couple months in the spring, Fox News carried live coverage of the Trump Administration’s Covid-19 Task Force updates. During those updates we were introduced to the team members, what their responsibilities were and how their plans were progressing along with the latest virus statistics. We heard about the activation of the Wartime Production Act to ramp up equipment and supply production. They covered the construction of hospital capacity and the revamping of two huge hospital ships to supplement NY and LA hospital capacity. We heard about travel bans. And we were introduced to the plan to speed up the production and distribution of vaccine. To anyone who saw the updates it sure sounded like there was a plan. So how did she go unchallenged? (The video included with NBC’s reporting of her speech stopped before it to the above section.)
Biden on Covid-19 Deaths:
‘If Donald Trump has his way, the complications from COVID-19, which are well beyond what they should be — it’s estimated that 200 million people have died — probably by the time I finish this talk,’ he said during a campaign speech.”Fox News
He went on to claim all 200,000 deaths were President Trump’s vault. He seemed to forget that governors of five northeastern states required nursing homes to accept Covid-19 infected patients resulting in the deaths of thousands of nursing home residents.