committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-10-29--CFACT activists distribute fact sheets to dispel election propaganda

For decades , the Left has been pushing a climate apocalypse – without any facts to back up their hysteria .
This election cycle is no different .
Climate alarmism is reaching new heights .
But the only thing that is “ alarming ” about climate change is the amount of misinformation bombarding the public on the issue from the Left .
That ’ s why this election season , CFACT has distributed fact sheets on climate change and the Green New Deal to over 50 county Republican organizations to educate the public around the nation !
CFACT ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most impact , delivering the truth to groups in North Carolina , Florida , Wisconsin , Minnesota , Michigan , Pennsylvania , Ohio , New Hampshire , Arizona , Nevada , Virginia , and California .
These educational flyers explain how the Green New Deal would be disastrous for America ’ s families and environment , how wildfires are due to bad forest management – not climate , how Leftist climate policies would do absolutely nothing to improve our environment , and more .
You can see the flyer for yourself here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ huge help as we try to educate Virginia voters on the horrible costs of the Green New Deal and radical climate change regulations .
Thank you CFACT !
” said Andi Bayer , Providence District Chair of the Fairfax County Republicans in Virginia .
To stay in line with CFACT ’ s 501 ( c ) 3 status , these flyers do not endorse a candidate , party , or specific legislation , but they do line out the hard facts to break through the Leftist propaganda being thrown at voters in these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of CFACT ’ s Collegians activists eagerly took part in the effort to deliver the truth to political organizations near them as well .
Here ’ s what Jacob Kramer , a student at Miami University in Ohio , had to say after he delivered fact sheets to the Butler County Republicans near his school : “ As we approach Election Day , it is very important the voters understand the sheer impact the Green New Deal will have upon our everyday life .
It would be devastating to all the environmental and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ usage of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing .
Even a small glimpse into the reality surrounding climate change would reveal this plan is more about increasing governmental control and letting people ‘ feel good ’ than actually solving the environmental problems we face today.
” Jacob gets it .
It ’ s not about the environment .
It ’ s about control .
Here ’ s another point we included in the climate fact sheets : The New York Times reported that Saikat Chakrabarti , Rep. Ocasio-Cortez ’ s former Chief of Staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn ’ t originally a climate thing at all.
” “ Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.
” The Left is no longer shy about what they ’ ll do with unchecked power .
What was once only discussed at backdoor meetings is now openly declared to the national media .
Fracking for natural gas , oil drilling , nuclear , and even gas-powered cars are all in their crosshairs .
We can no longer be shy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the truth , and share CFACT ’ s fact sheet with your family , friends and neighbors today !

For decades, the Left has been pushing a climate apocalypse – without any facts to back up their hysteria.
This election cycle is no different. Climate alarmism is reaching new heights.
But the only thing that is “alarming” about climate change is the amount of misinformation bombarding the public on the issue from the Left.
That’s why this election season, CFACT has distributed fact sheets on climate change and the Green New Deal to over 50 county Republican organizations to educate the public around the nation!
CFACT’s efforts focused on places that could have the most impact, delivering the truth to groups in North Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Hampshire, Arizona, Nevada, Virginia, and California.
These educational flyers explain how the Green New Deal would be disastrous for America’s families and environment, how wildfires are due to bad forest management – not climate, how Leftist climate policies would do absolutely nothing to improve our environment, and more.
You can see the flyer for yourself here.
“These flyers will be a huge help as we try to educate Virginia voters on the horrible costs of the Green New Deal and radical climate change regulations. Thank you CFACT!” said Andi Bayer, Providence District Chair of the Fairfax County Republicans in Virginia.
To stay in line with CFACT’s 501(c)3 status, these flyers do not endorse a candidate, party, or specific legislation, but they do line out the hard facts to break through the Leftist propaganda being thrown at voters in these last moments before Election Day.
Many of CFACT’s Collegians activists eagerly took part in the effort to deliver the truth to political organizations near them as well.
Here’s what Jacob Kramer, a student at Miami University in Ohio, had to say after he delivered fact sheets to the Butler County Republicans near his school: “As we approach Election Day, it is very important the voters understand the sheer impact the Green New Deal will have upon our everyday life. It would be devastating to all the environmental and economic advancements we have made through responsible usage of natural gas and hydraulic fracturing. Even a small glimpse into the reality surrounding climate change would reveal this plan is more about increasing governmental control and letting people ‘feel good’ than actually solving the environmental problems we face today.”
Jacob gets it. It’s not about the environment. It’s about control.
Here’s another point we included in the climate fact sheets: The New York Times reported that Saikat Chakrabarti, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s former Chief of Staff and architect of the GND, said: “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.” “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”
The Left is no longer shy about what they’ll do with unchecked power. What was once only discussed at backdoor meetings is now openly declared to the national media.
Fracking for natural gas, oil drilling, nuclear, and even gas-powered cars are all in their crosshairs. We can no longer be shy about fighting back.
Arm yourselves with the truth, and share CFACT’s fact sheet with your family, friends and neighbors today!


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-10-31--No need to dust off the Civilian Conservation Corps

America ’ s west has been burning in unprecedented ways .
California , Colorado , Oregon and Washington have had the worst wildfires in anyone ’ s memory .
In the Golden State , five of six largest wildfires in California ’ s history burned last summer , Dozens of fires have destroyed four million acres and more than 9,000 structures .
Something must be done .
Dusting off a relic dating back to President Franklin Roosevelt ’ s New Deal has been proposed as a solution : a new Civilian Conservation Corps ( CCC ) .
However , doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new and permanent , redundant bureaucracy will not prevent wildfires or solve other environmental problems .
Moreover , attempting to change climate change is not an option , even if you assume it ’ s the cause of wildfires ( it isn ’ t ) .
Average global temperature warming one-half degree in the last 40 years does not cause historic wildfires in the American west , Australia , or anywhere else .
Wildfires in the western United States are the result of dead trees piling up in forests , which creates a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reckless camper is all it takes to become a conflagration .
Fire prevention needs to occur now , not 30 to 50 years from now when the climate supposedly cools off after destroying our fossil fuel economy to eliminate net new carbon emissions .
The CCC served a valuable purpose for its time .
If you have ever traversed through a national or state park , you are likely enjoying the legacy of the CCC .
Created in 1933 , just one month after FDR took office , the agency was a work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between the age of 17 and 28 to work on environmental conservation projects .
By July of that year , more than 1,400 “ working camps ” had been established with more than 300,000 men working .
They fought forest fires , planted trees , implemented soil erosion controls , cleared access roads and much else .
The CCC lasted for nine years until 1942 , just after America entered World War II , when this age group was drafted to fight .
By its conclusion , the CCC employed nearly three million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trees and constructed trails and shelters in more than 800 parks across the country .
At least two bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress for a modern day CCC .
Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio proposed the 21st Century Civilian Conservation Corps Act and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois introduced the RENEW Conservation Corps Act that would authorize nearly $ 56 billion over five years for the program .
A present-day revival the Civilian Conservation Corps would makes little sense , even under certain , focused conditions .
There are plenty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to address environmental and conservation problems , but they ’ ve also in many instances contribute to these problems .
To mitigate wildfires , government and private industry must be allowed to clear forests and remove deadwood .
That would start with politically difficult changes to federal and state environmental restrictions so jealously guarded by the powerful Green lobby groups .
For example , the regulatory red tape from the National Environmental Policy Act and restrictions from the Clean Air Act and Endangered Species Act would need to be curtailed to allow for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would face the same impediments .
Logging and timber companies should be permitted to harvest more trees , which today comprise only one-tenth the amount that occurred on federal lands in 1988 .
This would save taxpayer/deficit dollars , clear more vulnerable forests , and thereby reduce wildfires .
Though the pandemic still affects America , the nation does not have 20-plus percent unemployment of the Great Depression ; rather , it has fallen below 8 percent , and declining .
In addition , two thirds of high school graduates attend college today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than in the 1930 ’ s .
A revival of a New Deal model of the CCC is impractical since the labor force may not exist .
Before the pandemic hit early in 2020 , there were more jobs going unfilled than unemployed Americans .
America ’ s economy is growing again and decades of environmental laws have improved water and air quality and conservation .
A modern version of the Civilian Conservation Corps to address the economic and environmental needs of today would be costly and superfluous to the existing federal and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not exist 90 years ago .
Instead , laws must be modernized to enable these agencies , working with and overseeing private contractors , to prevent wildfires and manage other environmental needs .

America’s west has been burning in unprecedented ways. California, Colorado, Oregon and Washington have had the worst wildfires in anyone’s memory. In the Golden State, five of six largest wildfires in California’s history burned last summer. Dozens of fires have destroyed four million acres and more than 9,000 structures.
Something must be done.
Dusting off a relic dating back to President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal has been proposed as a solution: a new Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). However, doing so is unnecessary and unworkable. A new and permanent, redundant bureaucracy will not prevent wildfires or solve other environmental problems.
Moreover, attempting to change climate change is not an option, even if you assume it’s the cause of wildfires (it isn’t). Average global temperature warming one-half degree in the last 40 years does not cause historic wildfires in the American west, Australia, or anywhere else.
Wildfires in the western United States are the result of dead trees piling up in forests, which creates a tinderbox. One bolt of lightening or reckless camper is all it takes to become a conflagration. Fire prevention needs to occur now, not 30 to 50 years from now when the climate supposedly cools off after destroying our fossil fuel economy to eliminate net new carbon emissions.
The CCC served a valuable purpose for its time. If you have ever traversed through a national or state park, you are likely enjoying the legacy of the CCC. Created in 1933, just one month after FDR took office, the agency was a work relief program that gave employment to men between the age of 17 and 28 to work on environmental conservation projects. By July of that year, more than 1,400 “working camps” had been established with more than 300,000 men. They fought forest fires, planted trees, implemented soil erosion controls, cleared access roads and much else.
The CCC lasted for nine years until 1942, just after America entered World War II, when this age group was drafted to fight. By its conclusion, the CCC employed nearly three million men who planted more than three billion trees and constructed trails and shelters in more than 800 parks across the country.
At least two bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress for a modern day CCC. Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio proposed the 21st Century Civilian Conservation Corps Act and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois introduced the RENEW Conservation Corps Act that would authorize nearly $56 billion over five years for the program.
A present-day revival the Civilian Conservation Corps would makes little sense, even under certain, focused conditions.
There are plenty of existing federal and state agencies established to address environmental and conservation problems, but they’ve also in many instances contribute to these problems. To mitigate wildfires, government and private industry must be allowed to clear more forests and remove deadwood. That would start with politically difficult changes to federal and state environmental restrictions so jealously guarded by the powerful Green lobby groups. For example, the regulatory red tape from the National Environmental Policy Act and restrictions from the Clean Air Act and Endangered Species Act would need to be curtailed to allow for more controlled burns. A new CCC would face the same impediments.
Logging and timber companies should be permitted to harvest more trees, which today comprise only one-tenth the amount that occurred on federal lands in 1988. This would save taxpayer/deficit dollars, clear more vulnerable forests, and thereby reduce wildfires.
Though the pandemic still affects America, the nation does not have 20-plus percent unemployment of the Great Depression; rather, it has fallen below 8 percent, and declining. In addition, two thirds of high school graduates attend college today, which is a much larger percentage than in the 1930’s. A revival of a New Deal model of the CCC is impractical since the labor force may not exist. Before the pandemic hit early in 2020, there were more jobs going unfilled than unemployed Americans.
America’s economy is growing again and decades of environmental laws have improved water and air quality and conservation. A modern version of the Civilian Conservation Corps to address the economic and environmental needs of today would be costly and superfluous to the existing federal and state government agencies, most of which did not exist 90 years ago. Instead, laws must be modernized to enable these agencies, working with and overseeing private contractors, to prevent wildfires and manage other environmental needs.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-10-31--Seeding “eelgrass” to restore Virginia’s coastal waters

Around 100 years ago , beds of eelgrass ( Zostera marina ) were common along Virginia ’ s coastline providing habitat for bay scallops and food for birds .
In fact , it was so plentiful that local residents would pack and bale it to insulate their homes .
In the 1930s , however , repeated hurricanes pounded the eelgrass , and then disease struck that all but wiped it out .
As a consequence , the once-vibrant seafloor became nothing but barren mud — decimating clams and crabs and wiping out bay scallops altogether .
Fortunately , some marine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and began a project to turn things around .
In a recently published study , they describe their 20-year project to reintroduce eelgrass into Virginia coastal bays .
As reported in The Conversation : “ Starting in 1999 , we collected seeds by hand from underwater meadows in nearby Chesapeake Bay – plucking the long reproductive shoots , bringing them back to our laboratory and holding them in large outdoor seawater tanks until they released their seeds naturally…In 2001 we sowed our first round by simply tossing seeds from a boat .
Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mud flats in waters 2 to 3 feet deep .
Returning the following year , we saw new seedlings sprouting up .
These initial plots took off and rapidly expanded .
By 2020 they covered 9,600 acres across four bays .
Several factors helped them flourish .
These bays are naturally flushed with cool , clean water from the Atlantic Ocean .
And they lie off the tip of Virginia ’ s eastern shore , where there is little coastal development .
To our surprise , fish and invertebrates returned within only a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These organisms have established extensive food webs that include species ranging from tiny seahorses to 6-foot-long sandbar sharks…Other benefits were equally dramatic .
Water in the bays become clearer as the seagrass canopy trapped floating particles and deposited them onto the bottom , burying significant stocks of carbon and nitrogen in sediments bound by the grasses ’ roots.
” Today , the restored zone now covers about 30 % of the bottom of the project area .
The researchers believe , however , that with more work the eelgrass will continue to thrive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To read The Conversation article in its entirety , click here .

Around 100 years ago, beds of eelgrass (Zostera marina) were common along Virginia’s coastline providing habitat for bay scallops and food for birds. In fact, it was so plentiful that local residents would pack and bale it to insulate their homes.
In the 1930s, however, repeated hurricanes pounded the eelgrass, and then disease struck that all but wiped it out. As a consequence, the once-vibrant seafloor became nothing but barren mud — decimating clams and crabs and wiping out bay scallops altogether.
Fortunately, some marine scientists who study sea grasses got involved and began a project to turn things around. In a recently published study, they describe their 20-year project to reintroduce eelgrass into Virginia coastal bays.
As reported in The Conversation:
“Starting in 1999, we collected seeds by hand from underwater meadows in nearby Chesapeake Bay – plucking the long reproductive shoots, bringing them back to our laboratory and holding them in large outdoor seawater tanks until they released their seeds naturally…In 2001 we sowed our first round by simply tossing seeds from a boat. Our first test plots covered 28 acres of mud flats in waters 2 to 3 feet deep. Returning the following year, we saw new seedlings sprouting up.
These initial plots took off and rapidly expanded. By 2020 they covered 9,600 acres across four bays. Several factors helped them flourish. These bays are naturally flushed with cool, clean water from the Atlantic Ocean. And they lie off the tip of Virginia’s eastern shore, where there is little coastal development.
To our surprise, fish and invertebrates returned within only a few years as the meadows expanded. These organisms have established extensive food webs that include species ranging from tiny seahorses to 6-foot-long sandbar sharks…Other benefits were equally dramatic. Water in the bays become clearer as the seagrass canopy trapped floating particles and deposited them onto the bottom, burying significant stocks of carbon and nitrogen in sediments bound by the grasses’ roots.”
Today, the restored zone now covers about 30% of the bottom of the project area. The researchers believe, however, that with more work the eelgrass will continue to thrive and expand for decades to come.
To read The Conversation article in its entirety, click here.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-01--Reliable electricity? Bah humbug!

Reliable electricity? Bah humbug!

In a refreshingly honest article in the Boston Review , David McDermott Hughes confirms something that we energy evangelists have been saying for some time : Environmentalists do not simply want people to transition to “ green energy , ” they want humanity put on energy rationing , for the good of the planet .
Now , apparently , they ’ ve also decided that we need to add intermittent fasting to our energy diet because , gosh darnit , electricity in developed countries like the United States is just too darn reliable for our own good !
It needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or , well , the planet is doomed .
According to Hughes , “ For those seriously concerned about climate change , the inverse—the demand for electrical continuity—may be the real problem.
” Yes , you read that right , the desire to have electricity available 24/7 is the cause of our global climate catastrophe , and we need to learn to live with intermittent energy like the happy campers of Zimbabwe and Puerto Rico which “ provide models for what we might call pause-full electricity.
” And who is first on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you are , you single-family home-dwelling environmental heretic .
Hughes explains that “ …each household demanding continuous electricity marginally exacerbates the climate crisis .
Perhaps , then , it is critical that we not store energy for these houses .
At least , we should not do so in a way that hobbles the transition away from fossil fuels .
We ought to consider waiting a few years for storage—enduring much more than six hours of downtime every year—for the sake of transitioning more rapidly away from fossil fuels.
” Surely you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intermittent blackouts and brownouts , right , suburbanites ?
This energy-rationing agenda has been hidden , heretofore , by a huge raft of bogus promises that would make the switch to renewables easy .
Batteries , we were told , will adapt so fast that we can go ahead and just build out wind and solar power , while letting conventional power plants wither and die , and everybody will have their cake and eat it too !
Unfortunately , the reality of battery storage limitations is just too obvious to people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the reality of batteries : they aren ’ t getting that much stronger over time .
As Mark Mills , of the Manhattan Institute points out ( and do read the whole thing ! )
: • About 60 pounds of batteries are needed to store the energy equivalent of one pound of hydrocarbons .
• At least 100 pounds of materials are mined , moved and processed for every pound of battery fabricated .
• Storing the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil , which weighs 300 pounds , requires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 200,000 worth ) .

In a refreshingly honest article in the Boston Review, David McDermott Hughes confirms something that we energy evangelists have been saying for some time: Environmentalists do not simply want people to transition to “green energy,” they want humanity put on energy rationing, for the good of the planet. Now, apparently, they’ve also decided that we need to add intermittent fasting to our energy diet because, gosh darnit, electricity in developed countries like the United States is just too darn reliable for our own good! It needs to go out once in a while, or, well, the planet is doomed.
According to Hughes, “For those seriously concerned about climate change, the inverse—the demand for electrical continuity—may be the real problem.” Yes, you read that right, the desire to have electricity available 24/7 is the cause of our global climate catastrophe, and we need to learn to live with intermittent energy like the happy campers of
Zimbabwe and Puerto Rico which “provide models for what we might call pause-full electricity.”
And who is first on the new electricity diet? Why, you are, you single-family home-dwelling environmental heretic. Hughes explains that “…each household demanding continuous electricity marginally exacerbates the climate crisis. Perhaps, then, it is critical that we not store energy for these houses. At least, we should not do so in a way that hobbles the transition away from fossil fuels. We ought to consider waiting a few years for storage—enduring much more than six hours of downtime every year—for the sake of transitioning more rapidly away from fossil fuels.”
Surely you can handle a “few years” of intermittent blackouts and brownouts, right, suburbanites?
This energy-rationing agenda has been hidden, heretofore, by a huge raft of bogus promises that would make the switch to renewables easy. Batteries, we were told, will adapt so fast that we can go ahead and just build out wind and solar power, while letting conventional power plants wither and die, and everybody will have their cake and eat it too! Unfortunately, the reality of battery storage limitations is just too obvious to people who see, day in and day out, the reality of batteries: they aren’t getting that much stronger over time. As Mark Mills, of the Manhattan Institute
points out (and do read the whole thing!):



committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-02--Manufacturing climate change deceptions — Part Two

It is astonishing how scientifically accurate data is used to create massive deceptions—namely involving man ’ s ability to overpower Mother Nature and control the thermostat of planet Earth .
While we are clearly not conspiracy theorists , man-caused global warming or climate change ( take your pick ) has been a mechanism used across the world to grow governments , converge to a one-world government and defeat capitalism in favor of world socialism .
The tool of choice is the use of well-chosen facts , casting aside facts not considered useful in order to deceive .
In science , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one chooses only the facts that support their beliefs while ignoring those that don ’ t .
In the first of this two-part series , we used material directly from government reports pointing out the information missing in order to make a dishonest presentation of information to the public .
We are doing the same here .
The article presented in black segments below allows us to illustrate how NASA/ NOAA and the UN/IPCC promote deception , using deliberate omissions to create a false understanding for the casual reader .
In this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half of the article that features NASA ’ s comments on Mars , Venus , and our Sun in their efforts to convince the reader that humanity controls Earth ’ s thermostat .
The article is from the National Aeronautics and Space Agency ( NASA ) , which appeared on September 16 , 2020 , is reproduced without any changes other than formatting for convenient reading .
The original can be found by clicking here .
You may want to read the original first .
In blue type following each final segment of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the deceptions NASA has created .
Without all the facts , the casual reader will arrive at the author ’ s desired false impression .
An example of how incomplete information creates a false impression is shown in Figure 1 .
Here we consider all the data available on the relationship between A and B , which could be dependent variables such as how A ( Sun ’ s radiation ) and B ( atmospheric temperature ) vary with each other .
Looking at all the data , the relationship shown as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if we choose to use only a small selection of data , we can arrive at any trend we desire .
This is the technique many government agencies use to achieve false impressions .
Not enough greenhouse effect : [ 11 ] The planet Mars has a very thin atmosphere , nearly all carbon dioxide .
Because of the low atmospheric pressure , and with little to no methane or water vapor to reinforce the weak greenhouse effect , Mars has a largely frozen surface that shows no evidence of life .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ implying an outright deception .
Mars is a dead planet for many reasons , none of which have anything to do with CO2 or human activities .
Too much greenhouse effect : [ 12 ] The atmosphere of Venus , like Mars , is nearly all carbon dioxide .
But Venus has about 154,000 times as much carbon dioxide in its atmosphere as Earth ( and about 19,000 times as much as Mars does ) , producing a runaway greenhouse effect and a surface temperature hot enough to melt lead .
[ 12 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ omission .
Venus is much closer to the Sun and hotter .
Its atmosphere is 90 times denser than the earth ’ s , and its barometric pressure would crush a person into a pancake .
Venus is a veritable hell on wheels and inhospitable to life for many reasons other than CO2 .
On Earth , human activities [ 13 ] are changing the natural greenhouse .
Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ burning process combines carbon with oxygen in the air to make CO2 .
To a lesser extent , the clearing of land for agriculture , industry , and other human activities has increased concentrations of greenhouse gases .
[ 14 ] The consequences of changing the natural atmospheric greenhouse are difficult to predict , but certain effects seem likely : [ 13 ] NASA makes several factual statements , but let us see what it does not tell us .
What they do not tell us are the proportional values and comparative context @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yes , we caused an increase in total CO2 but did not tell us that the human-caused increase is maybe only a few percent of total CO2 .
( 2 ) NASA fails to tell us by how much and what is the percent of the consequences are attributable to humanity .
See a detailed explanation of all the variables and their comparative contributions in the book “ A HITCHHIKER ‘ S JOURNEY THROUGH CLIMATE CHANGE.
” [ 14 ] In the below four bullets , note the repeated use of words “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Possibly , ” “ Could.
” The bottom line , NASA does not know what increased or decreased levels of CO2 do in the atmosphere .
This is especially true with clouds in the phase changes of water vapor to liquid or solid .
And neither do the classical skeptical scientists .
The science is simply too difficult , not well understood , and impossible to model accurately .
• On average , Earth will become warmer .
Some regions may welcome warmer temperatures , but others may not .
• Warmer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and precipitation overall , but individual regions will vary , some becoming wetter and others dryer .
• A stronger greenhouse effect will warm the oceans and partially melt glaciers and other ice , increasing sea level .
Ocean water also will expand if it warms , contributing further to sea level rise .
• Meanwhile , some crops and other plants may respond favorably to increased atmospheric CO2 , growing more vigorously , and using water more efficiently .
At the same time , higher temperatures and shifting climate patterns may change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affect the makeup of natural plant communities .
In its Fifth Assessment Report , the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations , concluded there ’ s a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet .
The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 412 parts per million in the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide , methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth ’ s temperatures over the past 50 years .
The United Nations ’ s/IPCC panel ’ s full report “ Summary for Policymakers ” is online The graph [ 15 ] compares global surface temperature changes ( red line ) and the Sun ’ s energy that Earth receives ( yellow line ) in watts ( units of energy ) per square @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show the yearly levels while the heavier/thicker lines show the 11-year average trends .
Eleven-year averages are used to reduce the year-to-year natural noise in the data , making the underlying trends more obvious .

It is astonishing how scientifically accurate data is used to create massive deceptions—namely involving man’s ability to overpower Mother Nature and control the thermostat of planet Earth.
While we are clearly not conspiracy theorists, man-caused global warming or climate change (take your pick) has been a mechanism used across the world to grow governments, converge to a one-world government and defeat capitalism in favor of world socialism. The tool of choice is the use of well-chosen facts, casting aside facts not considered useful in order to deceive. In science, this is called cherry-picking. Lacking ethics, one chooses only the facts that support their beliefs while ignoring those that don’t.
In the first of this two-part series, we used material directly from government reports pointing out the information missing in order to make a dishonest presentation of information to the public. We are doing the same here.
The article presented in black segments below allows us to illustrate how NASA/NOAA and the UN/IPCC promote deception, using deliberate omissions to create a false understanding for the casual reader. In this essay, we focus on the last half of the article that features NASA’s comments on Mars, Venus and our Sun in their efforts to convince the reader that humanity controls Earth’s thermostat.
The article is from the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA), which appeared on September 16, 2020, is reproduced without any changes other than formatting for convenient reading. The original can be found by clicking here. You may want to read the original first.
In blue type following each final segment of the NASA article, we provide commentary on the deceptions NASA has created. Without all the facts, the casual reader will arrive at the author’s desired false impression. An example of how incomplete information creates a false impression is shown in Figure 1. Here we consider all the data available on the relationship between A and B, which could be dependent variables such as how A (Sun’s radiation) and B (atmospheric temperature) vary with each other. Looking at all the data, the relationship shown as Trend 1 is clearly correct. However, if we choose to use only a small selection of data, we can arrive at any trend we desire. This is the technique many government agencies use to achieve false impressions.
Not enough greenhouse effect: [11] The planet Mars has a very thin atmosphere, nearly all carbon dioxide. Because of the low atmospheric pressure, and with little to no methane or water vapor to reinforce the weak greenhouse effect, Mars has a largely frozen surface that shows no evidence of life.
[11] A true statement is implying an outright deception. Mars is a dead planet for many reasons, none of which have anything to do with CO2 or human activities.
Too much greenhouse effect: [12] The atmosphere of Venus, like Mars, is nearly all carbon dioxide. But Venus has about 154,000 times as much carbon dioxide in its atmosphere as Earth (and about 19,000 times as much as Mars does), producing a runaway greenhouse effect and a surface temperature hot enough to melt lead.
[12] NASA is again misleading us by omission. Venus is much closer to the Sun and hotter. Its atmosphere is 90 times denser than the earth’s, and its barometric pressure would crush a person into a pancake. Venus is a veritable hell on wheels and inhospitable to life for many reasons other than CO2.
On Earth, human activities [13] are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). This happens because the coal or oil burning process combines carbon with oxygen in the air to make CO2. To a lesser extent, the clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities has increased concentrations of greenhouse gases.
[14] The consequences of changing the natural atmospheric greenhouse are difficult to predict, but certain effects seem likely:
[13] NASA makes several factual statements, but let us see what it does not tell us. What they do not tell us are the proportional values and comparative context. For example: (1) Yes, we caused an increase in total CO2 but did not tell us that the human-caused increase is maybe only a few percent of total CO2. (2) NASA fails to tell us by how much and what is the percent of the consequences are attributable to humanity. See a detailed explanation of all the variables and their comparative contributions in the book “A HITCHHIKER‘S JOURNEY THROUGH CLIMATE CHANGE.”
[14] In the below four bullets, note the repeated use of words “Probably,” “May,” “Possibly,” “Could.” The bottom line, NASA does not know what increased or decreased levels of CO2 do in the atmosphere. This is especially true with clouds in the phase changes of water vapor to liquid or solid. And neither do the classical skeptical scientists. The science is simply too difficult, not well understood, and impossible to model accurately.
On average, Earth will become warmer. Some regions may welcome warmer temperatures, but others may not.
Warmer conditions will probably lead to more evaporation and precipitation overall, but individual regions will vary, some becoming wetter and others dryer.
A stronger greenhouse effect will warm the oceans and partially melt glaciers and other ice, increasing sea level. Ocean water also will expand if it warms, contributing further to sea level rise.
Meanwhile, some crops and other plants may respond favorably to increased atmospheric CO2, growing more vigorously, and using water more efficiently. At the same time, higher temperatures and shifting climate patterns may change the areas where crops grow best and affect the makeup of natural plant communities.
The Role of Human Activity
In its Fifth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there’s a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.
The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 412 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there’s a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth’s temperatures over the past 50 years.
The United Nations’ s/IPCC panel’s full report “Summary for Policymakers” is online https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf .
Solar Irradiance
The graph [15] compares global surface temperature changes (red line) and the Sun’s energy that Earth receives (yellow line) in watts (units of energy) per square meter since 1880. The lighter/thinner lines show the yearly levels while the heavier/thicker lines show the 11-year average trends. Eleven-year averages are used to reduce the year-to-year natural noise in the data, making the underlying trends more obvious.
[15] NASA uses only “Surface Temperatures” to measure the global temperature because they are easy to manipulate and have been manipulated. This manipulation was the fudging that was exposed in 2009 by the “ClimateGate” scandal. If it were replaced it with Satellite temperatures, the red line would have the same trend as the yellow line.
The amount of solar energy that Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly. It is, therefore, extremely unlikely [16] that the Sun has caused the observed global temperature warming trend over the past half-century. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech.
[16] This is written by a NASA lawyer, leading you to think the way they want you to think. At face value, I would agree if it said “unlikely,” but more important is what they do not say on possible other causes for the warming, as discussed above, especially galactic cosmic rays and volcanic activities.
It’s reasonable to assume that changes in the Sun’s energy output would cause the climate to change, since the Sun is the fundamental source of energy that drives our climate system.
[17] Classical scientists do not know the role of TSI in climate change; perhaps it‘s little more than a thermostat that‘s telling the furnace what to do. See our discussions above on the causes of climate change.
[18] Indeed, studies show that solar variability has played a role in past climate changes. For example, a decrease in solar activity coupled with an increase in volcanic activity is thought to have helped trigger the Little Ice Age between approximately 1650 and 1850, when Greenland cooled from 1410 to the 1720s and glaciers advanced in the Alps.
[18] A truthful statement to set up the ensuing deception, but don‘t‘ tell us when, why, or how TSI stopped being a factor.
[19] But several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the Sun:
[19] If NASA had used the satellite temperatures instead of the fudged Surface Temperatures, they could not make this statement.
Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the Sun either remained constant or increased slightly.
[20] If the warming were caused by a more active Sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere and a warming at the surface and lower parts of the atmosphere. That’s because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.
[20] Satellite data shows global warming stopped about 20-years ago, matching the TSI decline. It‘s only the fudged NASA surface temperature that continues to increase because they manufactured the increase.
[21] Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases.
[21] Climate models cannot accurately reproduce anything with any accuracy. Climate models have been and continue to be notoriously inaccurate, showing increases by 2 – 3 degrees C more than the actual satellite and balloon data.
We all pay a considerable price for the misleading and irresponsible NASA articles.
– The newspapers/media quickly pick them up and use them to fabricate threatening headlines to sell themselves and their political goals, socialism, and a one-world government.
– Politicians use the headlines to gain support from an uninformed public—teachers poison students with fear of a future that will not occur.
We trust that this two-part tutorial will help the reader better understand the curtains that too many government agencies use to pull over the public’s eyes.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-01--EP 116: How Drug Cartels Are Destroying America’s Public Lands (ft. John Nores)

In Episode 116 of District of Conservation , Gabriella interviews John Nores—retired California Fish and Wildlife game warden who helped @ @ @ @ @ , three-time author , TV host , conservationist , and avid hunter .
John came @ @ @ @ @ cartels are destroying America ’ s public lands with their illegal activities , the gray @ @ @ @ @ importance of hunters and anglers in conservation , cohosting the Thin Green Line/Warden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ more .

In Episode 116 of District of Conservation, Gabriella interviews John Nores—retired California Fish and Wildlife game warden who helped pilot the Marijuana Enforcement Team, three-time author, TV host, conservationist, and avid hunter.
John came on to discuss how drug cartels are destroying America’s public lands with their illegal activities, the gray wolf delisting news, the importance of hunters and anglers in conservation, cohosting the Thin Green Line/Warden’s Watch podcasts, and much more.
WATCH
LISTEN
*SHOW NOTES*
Leave a ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ review on Apple Podcasts
Connect with John
John’s Website, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube
Buy HIDDEN WAR
Thin Green Line Show | Recoil TV
Subscribe to the Thin Green Line podcast
Photo Credit: John Nores/Facebook


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-03--CLINTEL challenges McKinsey’s climate alarmism

and Company is the world ’ s biggest management consulting firm , with annual revenue topping ten billion dollars .
Lately they have launched a climate scare campaign , no doubt hoping to make a fortune from it , but has called them out .
CLINTEL has sent a succinct of challenge to the McKinsey Global Institute ( ) which generates much of the scary stuff .
MGI is a McKinsey subsidiary and brags that it is one of the world ’ s biggest think tanks .
This issue is important because while most businesses could care less what the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they will listen to McKinsey .
The specific target of CLINTEL ’ s letter is a voluminous released in September , titled simply “ McKinsey on Climate Change “ .
Thus this is the official voice of McKinsey .
This so-called report is really just a 216 page collection of scary stories .
The report begins with this dire warming : “ The changing climate is poised to create a wide array of economic , business , and social risks over the next three decades .
Leaders should start integrating climate risk into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better to help them integrate these supposed near term risks than McKinsey , for fat fees of course ?
Interesting that the climate is only poised to create these risks , not yet creating them it seems , but I digress .
McKinsey is quite clear that folks need help , saying “ Stakeholders can address the risk posed by climate change only if they understand it clearly and see the nuances that make it so complicated to confront.
” Here are some sample McKinsey scare stories : Will infrastructure bend or break @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the weak link in your supply chain ?
The zero-carbon car : Abating material emissions is next on the agenda .
Will the world ’ s breadbaskets become less reliable ?
CLINTEL goes to the heart of all this darkness , namely that it is based on bogus modeling .
To begin with , it is based on the ridiculous IPCC future emissions scenario called 8.5 for short .
Here is how CLINTEL puts it : “ As you state , [ you ] rely on the RCP8.5 scenario of the IPCC AR5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as that scenario was developed in AR5 to model a world growing as the then rate of China .
That scenario is most implausible , RCP4.5 , if any , now being significantly more relevant .
Furthermore , in using the Woods Hole Research Centre ( WHRC ) models , you project reaching a global temperature of 2.3°C above pre-industrial by 2050 , with a possible 1.8m sea-level rise by 2100 , both inexplicably well beyond the SR8.5 extreme case figures .
Under these WHRC models , it is no surprise that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better belong , we suggest , in the field of science fiction .
Your extreme point of view may seriously hurt the reputation.
” So not only does McKinsey use the silly scenario 8.5 , they actually go way beyond it !
Of course when you are drumming up billions in new business you want a really big drum .
The letter is signed by Professor Guus Berkhout , CLINTEL President .
It ends with this concern and challenge : “ We therefore see no climate emergency whatsoever .
In addition , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of global economic resources , as your publications seem to suggest , to an exaggerated climate threat .
Why does an ethical company such as McKinsey , we wonder , take such an extreme position ?
You and your scientific advisors would be very welcome to hold a debate with our world-class scientists .
We look forward to your response.
” Professor Berkhout ’ s message to potential McKinsey customers is : “ Be aware that if you adapt your business strategy to the most unlikely climate scenario RCP 8.5 , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
McKinsey and Company has been associated with a number of notable scandals including the collapse of Enron in 2001 and the 2007-2008 financial crisis .
Given that McKinsey stands to make huge amounts of money pushing these unfounded scary stories , one wonders if fraud is an issue .

McKinsey and Company is the world’s biggest management consulting firm, with annual revenue topping ten billion dollars. Lately they have launched a climate scare campaign, no doubt hoping to make a fortune from it, but CLINTEL has called them out.
CLINTEL has sent a succinct letter of challenge to the McKinsey Global Institute ( MGI ) which generates much of the scary stuff. MGI is a McKinsey subsidiary and brags that it is one of the world’s biggest think tanks.
This issue is important because while most businesses could care less what the UN IPCC says about climate change, they will listen to McKinsey. The specific target of CLINTEL’s letter is a voluminous report released in September, titled simply “McKinsey on Climate Change“. Thus this is the official voice of McKinsey. This so-called report is really just a 216 page collection of scary stories.
The report begins with this dire warming: “The changing climate is poised to create a wide array of economic, business, and social risks over the next three decades. Leaders should start integrating climate risk into their decision making now.”
And who better to help them integrate these supposed near term risks than McKinsey, for fat fees of course? Interesting that the climate is only poised to create these risks, not yet creating them it seems, but I digress.
McKinsey is quite clear that folks need help, saying “Stakeholders can address the risk posed by climate change only if they understand it clearly and see the nuances that make it so complicated to confront.”
Here are some sample McKinsey scare stories:
Will infrastructure bend or break under climate stress?
Could climate become the weak link in your supply chain?
Banking imperatives for managing climate risk.
The zero-carbon car: Abating material emissions is next on the agenda.
Will the world’s breadbaskets become less reliable?
CLINTEL goes to the heart of all this darkness, namely that it is based on bogus modeling. To begin with, it is based on the ridiculous IPCC future emissions scenario called 8.5 for short. Here is how CLINTEL puts it:
“As you state, [you] rely on the RCP8.5 scenario of the IPCC AR5 CMIP5 models, inappropriate in our view, as that scenario was developed in AR5 to model a world growing as the then rate of China. That scenario is most implausible, RCP4.5, if any, now being significantly more relevant. Furthermore, in using the Woods Hole Research Centre (WHRC) models, you project reaching a global temperature of 2.3°C above pre-industrial by 2050, with a possible 1.8m sea-level rise by 2100, both inexplicably well beyond the SR8.5 extreme case figures. Under these WHRC models, it is no surprise that your projections for future climate impacts may better belong, we suggest, in the field of science fiction. Your extreme point of view may seriously hurt the reputation.”
So not only does McKinsey use the silly scenario 8.5, they actually go way beyond it! Of course when you are drumming up billions in new business you want a really big drum.
The letter is signed by Professor Guus Berkhout, CLINTEL President. It ends with this concern and challenge:
“We therefore see no climate emergency whatsoever. In addition, we are very concerned of a gigantic misallocation of global economic resources, as your publications seem to suggest, to an exaggerated climate threat. Why does an ethical company such as McKinsey, we wonder, take such an extreme position?
You and your scientific advisors would be very welcome to hold a debate with our world-class scientists. We look forward to your response.”
Professor Berkhout’s message to potential McKinsey customers is: “Be aware that if you adapt your business strategy to the most unlikely climate scenario RCP 8.5, it is most likely you use the wrong strategy”.
McKinsey and Company has been associated with a number of notable scandals including the collapse of Enron in 2001 and the 2007-2008 financial crisis. Given that McKinsey stands to make huge amounts of money pushing these unfounded scary stories, one wonders if fraud is an issue.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-05--Out of Africa an entrepreneurial society emerges

“ By their very nature , young Africans are some of the most entrepreneurial people in the world .
Up until now , they just lacked opportunity , access to capital or even the courage to believe in themselves , ” Ivor Ichikowitz said in a recent Zoom interview with me .
The South African industrialist , social entrepreneur and philanthropist ’ s family foundation sponsors and funds the Africa Youth Survey , which tracks the attitudes , aspirations and opportunities of African youth in 14 countries .
“ Whether or not U.S. policy makers have been paying attention to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to America .
I don ’ t even think most American legislators understand the positive impact that American culture and technology have had on the continent , ” Ichikowitz lamented .
“ Despite the Chinese penetration into many African countries , all that needs to happen is for the Americans to turn up – to fill the vacuum they created.
” In fact , the United States has an astoundingly fresh opportunity to partner with young African entrepreneurs , build the Africa of tomorrow and make the Dark Continent a burgeoning mecca for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Although China has taken full advantage of U.S. reluctance to invest in Africa ’ s future and end the stigma of European colonialism , many Africans see the Chinese as just another generation of exploiters .
The Youth Survey shows that young Africans have a far closer affinity to American products , culture and values , and the American way of life , than anything coming out of China , he observes .
China is not a party to the Equator Principles , which require that Western financial institutions meet World Bank social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heavy emphasis on manmade climate change , eliminating fossil fuels , and financing only wind , solar and biofuel projects .
This too discouraged Western capital from reaching Africa ’ s shores , opening the door to Chinese influence .
“ What we wanted to do in the Survey , ” said Ichikowitz , “ was to show America and the world that there is a sleeping giant – over a billion people in the world ’ s youngest , most entrepreneurial region .
This generation of Africans is committed to not being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colonialism and Apartheid .
They see themselves as intellectual , economic and social equals with their peers in the developed world.
” The Survey underscores the truth of this perception .
The actual survey involved face-to-face interviews with 4,200 young Africans , ages 18-24 , of all educational levels , from 14 sub-Saharan countries .
A startling 76 % said they want to start a business in the next five years ; 60 % already have an idea for a business or social enterprise .
Four out of five see Wi-Fi access as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will change Africa ’ s future for the better .
Three in four believe they can positively change their communities through their work .
In the past 15–20 years , this emerging generation of Africans has used Internet access to garner information , overwhelmingly America-based , to educate and thus liberate themselves .
This access – including social media aspects and business , technical and other valuable information – has helped young Africans break the shackles of prior generations who , after centuries of colonialist propaganda and restrictions , distrusted successful blacks as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been not mere Internet access , but the social connections and ability to get data ( mostly via cellular phones , as access to plug-in electricity remains sparse across much of the continent ) that “ has changed the lives of hundreds of millions of people across sub-Saharan Africa over the last 10 to 15 years.
” Little wonder many young Africans view Internet access as more vital to their futures than even electricity and running water .
Nearly 15 years ago , this writer contributed to an article published in European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Party ) in which my colleagues and I stated : “ Thanks to the almost universal access to cellular telephones and the Internet , Africa is maturing politically and economically , even in countries where oppression is widespread… .
Many Africans are tired of 400 years of colonialism and its ongoing vestiges in the post-colonial era , and others are responding to their cries to ‘ let my people go.
’ ” In that same article we quoted Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto , who explained in his seminal book , The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Third World … are teeming with entrepreneurs … who possess talent , enthusiasm and an astonishing ability to wring a profit out of practically nothing .
Most of the poor already possess the assets they need to make a success of capitalism.
” The problem , de Soto stressed , is that their assets are primarily intellect , talent , drive and persistence .
They lack access to financial capital [ and to abundant , reliable , affordable energy ] to turn their dreams and often brilliant ideas into reality .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Africa Youth Survey , Ichikowitz says this generation of young Africans is “ connected to the world and out there doing incredibly innovative things with nothing .
They are not just optimistic about the much-vaunted African century , they are determined to shape that century.
” We also quoted economist C. K. Prahalad , who in his game-changing book , The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid , had argued : “ We must stop thinking of the poor as victims or as a burden , and start recognizing them as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ who ] … may well be able to transform their societies and economies dramatically in a very short time frame.
” “ In the context of Africa , where we have had to leapfrog other technologies , ” Ichikowitz explained in our interview , “ the Internet is a more important tool than the wheel .
Think about how far behind Africa was 15 to 20 years ago – and how quickly Africa has caught up.
” Today ’ s young Africans , the survey shows , are optimistic , committed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and determined to compete successfully in the developed world .
Their entire continent cries out for electrification , transportation systems and other technologies for which financing has been scarce and wrapped with strings .
Three-fourths of African youth believe in a common African identify based largely on culture and shared history , the survey found .
Five of eight believe African nations should set aside differences and come together to achieve common solutions .
Seven of eight remain inspired by the life and teachings of the late South African leader Nelson Mandela .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ African youth are divided on whether democracy or stability is more important for the continent , most believe in the democratic values of participation , tolerance and freedom .
Historically , African tribes allowed open discussion of matters of mutual importance ( democracy ) , as well as firm , final decisions by tribal chiefs ( stability ) .
That may be why today ’ s generation is equally divided between a desire for democracy versus stability in government .
Of course , both are important .
The appeal of results-oriented leadership , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ youths believe President Trump ( at 22 % ) has the greatest ability to influence their future .
Tech entrepreneurs Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates finished behind Trump , with Chinese President Xi Jinping a distant fourth .
No current African leader received more than a 5 % share .
So whoever wins the presidential election should recognize that sub-Saharan Africa ’ s more than one billion people represent markets for American goods , Ichikowitz said .
Positive outreach to Africa would also provide opportunities to bring African and African-American entrepreneurs together , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That would be true win-win-win .

“By their very nature, young Africans are some of the most entrepreneurial people in the world. Up until now, they just lacked opportunity, access to capital or even the courage to believe in themselves,” Ivor Ichikowitz said in a recent Zoom interview with me. The South African industrialist, social entrepreneur and philanthropist’s family foundation sponsors and funds the Africa Youth Survey, which tracks the attitudes, aspirations and opportunities of African youth in 14 countries.
“Whether or not U.S. policy makers have been paying attention to Africa, young Africans are paying attention to America. I don’t even think most American legislators understand the positive impact that American culture and technology have had on the continent,” Ichikowitz lamented. “Despite the Chinese penetration into many African countries, all that needs to happen is for the Americans to turn up – to fill the vacuum they created.”
In fact, the United States has an astoundingly fresh opportunity to partner with young African entrepreneurs, build the Africa of tomorrow and make the Dark Continent a burgeoning mecca for American goods, Ichikowitz is convinced.
Although China has taken full advantage of U.S. reluctance to invest in Africa’s future and end the stigma of European colonialism, many Africans see the Chinese as just another generation of exploiters. The Youth Survey shows that young Africans have a far closer affinity to American products, culture and values, and the American way of life, than anything coming out of China, he observes.
China is not a party to the Equator Principles, which require that Western financial institutions meet World Bank social and environmental policies that have put a heavy emphasis on manmade climate change, eliminating fossil fuels, and financing only wind, solar and biofuel projects. This too discouraged Western capital from reaching Africa’s shores, opening the door to Chinese influence.
“What we wanted to do in the Survey,” said Ichikowitz, “was to show America and the world that there is a sleeping giant – over a billion people in the world’s youngest, most entrepreneurial region. This generation of Africans is committed to not being held back by the 400-year legacy of colonialism and Apartheid. They see themselves as intellectual, economic and social equals with their peers in the developed world.” The Survey underscores the truth of this perception.
The actual survey involved face-to-face interviews with 4,200 young Africans, ages 18-24, of all educational levels, from 14 sub-Saharan countries. A startling 76% said they want to start a business in the next five years; 60% already have an idea for a business or social enterprise. Four out of five see Wi-Fi access as a fundamental human right and believe technology will change Africa’s future for the better. Three in four believe they can positively change their communities through their work.
In the past 15–20 years, this emerging generation of Africans has used Internet access to garner information, overwhelmingly America-based, to educate and thus liberate themselves. This access – including social media aspects and business, technical and other valuable information – has helped young Africans break the shackles of prior generations who, after centuries of colonialist propaganda and restrictions, distrusted successful blacks as surely corrupt and thus untrustworthy.
It has been not mere Internet access, but the social connections and ability to get data (mostly via cellular phones, as access to plug-in electricity remains sparse across much of the continent) that “has changed the lives of hundreds of millions of people across sub-Saharan Africa over the last 10 to 15 years.” Little wonder many young Africans view Internet access as more vital to their futures than even electricity and running water.
Nearly 15 years ago, this writer contributed to an article published in European View (by the European People’s Party) in which my colleagues and I stated: “Thanks to the almost universal access to cellular telephones and the Internet, Africa is maturing politically and economically, even in countries where oppression is widespread…. Many Africans are tired of 400 years of colonialism and its ongoing vestiges in the post-colonial era, and others are responding to their cries to ‘let my people go.’”
In that same article we quoted Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto, who explained in his seminal book, The Mystery of Capital, “The cities of the Third World … are teeming with entrepreneurs … who possess talent, enthusiasm and an astonishing ability to wring a profit out of practically nothing. Most of the poor already possess the assets they need to make a success of capitalism.”
The problem, de Soto stressed, is that their assets are primarily intellect, talent, drive and persistence. They lack access to financial capital [and to abundant, reliable, affordable energy] to turn their dreams and often brilliant ideas into reality.
And yet, in the foreword to the Africa Youth Survey, Ichikowitz says this generation of young Africans is “connected to the world and out there doing incredibly innovative things with nothing. They are not just optimistic about the much-vaunted African century, they are determined to shape that century.”
We also quoted economist C. K. Prahalad, who in his game-changing book, The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, had argued: “We must stop thinking of the poor as victims or as a burden, and start recognizing them as resilient and creative entrepreneurs and value-conscious consumers [who] … may well be able to transform their societies and economies dramatically in a very short time frame.”
“In the context of Africa, where we have had to leapfrog other technologies,” Ichikowitz explained in our interview, “the Internet is a more important tool than the wheel. Think about how far behind Africa was 15 to 20 years ago – and how quickly Africa has caught up.”
Today’s young Africans, the survey shows, are optimistic, committed to human rights, eager to start businesses and determined to compete successfully in the developed world. Their entire continent cries out for electrification, transportation systems and other technologies for which financing has been scarce and wrapped with strings.
Three-fourths of African youth believe in a common African identify based largely on culture and shared history, the survey found. Five of eight believe African nations should set aside differences and come together to achieve common solutions. Seven of eight remain inspired by the life and teachings of the late South African leader Nelson Mandela.
The survey also found that, while African youth are divided on whether democracy or stability is more important for the continent, most believe in the democratic values of participation, tolerance and freedom. Historically, African tribes allowed open discussion of matters of mutual importance (democracy), as well as firm, final decisions by tribal chiefs (stability). That may be why today’s generation is equally divided between a desire for democracy versus stability in government. Of course, both are important.
The appeal of results-oriented leadership, Ichikowitz suggests, may explain why African youths believe President Trump (at 22%) has the greatest ability to influence their future. Tech entrepreneurs Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates finished behind Trump, with Chinese President Xi Jinping a distant fourth. No current African leader received more than a 5% share.
So whoever wins the presidential election should recognize that sub-Saharan Africa’s more than one billion people represent markets for American goods, Ichikowitz said. Positive outreach to Africa would also provide opportunities to bring African and African-American entrepreneurs together, given their common history of oppression. That would be true win-win-win.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-04--Last sighted in 1924, will grizzlies return to California?

It seems like a strange question to ask , especially given that California was once known as the “ Bear State Republic ” and even sports a grizzly on its own state flag .
Nevertheless , grizzlies no longer reside in the Golden State .
That ’ s why conservationists are giving serious consideration to repopulating California with them in order to restore the animal ’ s natural range and improve the state ’ s natural biodiversity .
Historically , scientists estimate there were around 10,000 bears romping through California ’ s forests a few hundred years ago .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Bear.
” He lived over twenty years in captivity and was paraded before thousands at the 1894 World ’ s Fair before ultimately being euthanized in 1911 .
The last reported sighting of a wild grizzly was in 1924 .
Today grizzlies only exist outside California — in a few pockets throughout the Rocky Mountains , or about four percent of their historical range .
But that may be about to change .
The California Grizzly Research Network is undertaking an effort to bring about a reintroduction of the bears .
Peter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the author of After the Grizzly : Endangered Species and the Politics of Place in California , was recently interviewed by InsideHook magazine , and had this to say : “ We know that tolerance for large carnivores is generally increasing , ” Alagona says .
“ California has seen its population of black bears roughly quadruple , and there ’ s now a population approaching 40,000 — certainly more than 30,000 .
All of these factors presented an opportunity .
Grizzlies are part of California : You ’ ve got the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our state flag — they ’ re everywhere here , except in the actual flesh.
” Alagona ’ s group — including researchers , ethicists , and scientists , are investigating issues like the genetic similarities between California grizzlies and other populations of grizzlies and are preparing their findings for release and public discussion in 2024 .
Not by coincidence , that year marks 100 years since the final California grizzly sighting , in Sequoia National Park .
To read the article in its entirety in InsideHook , click here .

Will grizzly bears return to California?
It seems like a strange question to ask, especially given that California was once known as the “Bear State Republic” and even sports a grizzly on its own state flag. Nevertheless, grizzlies no longer reside in the Golden State. That’s why conservationists are giving serious consideration to repopulating California with them in order to restore the animal’s natural range and improve the state’s natural biodiversity.
Historically, scientists estimate there were around 10,000 bears romping through California’s forests a few hundred years ago. The last known one was called “Monarch the Bear.” He lived over twenty years in captivity and was paraded before thousands at the 1894 World’s Fair before ultimately being euthanized in 1911. The last reported sighting of a wild grizzly was in 1924. Today grizzlies only exist outside California — in a few pockets throughout the Rocky Mountains, or about four percent of their historical range.
But that may be about to change.
The California Grizzly Research Network is undertaking an effort to bring about a reintroduction of the bears. Peter Alagona, a leader of this network and the author of After the Grizzly: Endangered Species and the Politics of Place in California, was recently interviewed by InsideHook magazine, and had this to say:
“We know that tolerance for large carnivores is generally increasing,” Alagona says. “California has seen its population of black bears roughly quadruple, and there’s now a population approaching 40,000 — certainly more than 30,000. All of these factors presented an opportunity. Grizzlies are part of California: You’ve got the UCLA Bruins, they’re on our state flag — they’re everywhere here, except in the actual flesh.”
Alagona’s group — including researchers, ethicists, and scientists, are investigating issues like the genetic similarities between California grizzlies and other populations of grizzlies and are preparing their findings for release and public discussion in 2024. Not by coincidence, that year marks 100 years since the final California grizzly sighting, in Sequoia National Park.
To read the article in its entirety in InsideHook, click here.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-03--EP 117: From Game Warden to Podcaster (ft. Lt. Wayne Saunders)

In Episode 117 of District of Conservation , Gabriella speaks with retired NH Fish & Game game warden , Lt. @ @ @ @ @ a retired Lieutenant Conservation Officer from the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department .
An @ @ @ @ @ Enforcement Officer overseeing patrols in the northern reaches of New Hampshire from Mount Washington to @ @ @ @ @ still considers natural resource protection a passion and calling .
He became a “ cowboy @ @ @ @ @ 1995 and served until May of 2018 , spanning 23 years in service .
He @ @ @ @ @ Planet TV program , NORTH WOODS LAW , and hosts Warden ’ s Watch and @ @ @ @ @ podcast with John Nores .

In Episode 117 of District of Conservation, Gabriella speaks with retired NH Fish & Game game warden, Lt. Wayne Saunders. He is a retired Lieutenant Conservation Officer from the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. An honored and celebrated wildlife Law Enforcement Officer overseeing patrols in the northern reaches of New Hampshire from Mount Washington to the Canadian border, he still considers natural resource protection a passion and calling. He became a “cowboy of the woods” in 1995 and served until May of 2018, spanning 23 years in service. He appeared on the popular Animal Planet TV program, NORTH WOODS LAW, and hosts Warden’s Watch and co-hosts the Thin Green Line podcast with John Nores.
LISTEN


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-06--Tortoise thought to be extinct found on Galapagos Island

An expedition to the island of Fernandina of the Galapagos Islands has found a female of the species Chelonoidis phantasticus , or the Fernandina giant tortoise .
The tortoise was orginally thought to be extinct , as a member of the species had not been seen since 1906 .
In even better news , the team that found the Fernandina giant tortoise believes there are more alive on the island , based off of droppings and tracks .
“ ‘ The photos from the team clearly show a moderately saddle-backed , old female about half to two-thirds the size of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this is almost undoubtedly the lost Fernandina Giant Tortoise , ’ says Anders Rhodin from the Turtle Conservancy and International Union for Conservation of Nature , in the statement .
“ The team members suspect more tortoises may live on Fernandina because of scat and tracks they observed there .
The expedition included members from the Galapagos National Park , the Galapagos Conservancy , and Animal Planet , which funded the search and will feature it on an episode of the show ‘ Extinct or Alive.
’ ” The end goal is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ species , if their suspicions that additional tortoises are alive proves true .
Females can store sperm for a long period of time , according to Duke University professor of conservation ecology Stuart Pimm .
This gives hope for the species , and biodiversity of the Galapagos !
To read the story in TheScientist , click here .

An expedition to the island of Fernandina of the Galapagos Islands has found a female of the species Chelonoidis phantasticus, or the Fernandina giant tortoise.
The tortoise was orginally thought to be extinct, as a member of the species had not been seen since 1906.
In even better news, the team that found the Fernandina giant tortoise believes there are more alive on the island, based off of droppings and tracks.
TheScientist reports:
“‘The photos from the team clearly show a moderately saddle-backed, old female about half to two-thirds the size of the known male. Pending genetic confirmation, this is almost undoubtedly the lost Fernandina Giant Tortoise,’ says Anders Rhodin from the Turtle Conservancy and International Union for Conservation of Nature, in the statement.
“The team members suspect more tortoises may live on Fernandina because of scat and tracks they observed there. The expedition included members from the Galapagos National Park, the Galapagos Conservancy, and Animal Planet, which funded the search and will feature it on an episode of the show ‘Extinct or Alive.’”
The end goal is to of course breed more of the species, if their suspicions that additional tortoises are alive proves true.
Females can store sperm for a long period of time, according to Duke University professor of conservation ecology Stuart Pimm.
This gives hope for the species, and biodiversity of the Galapagos!
To read the story in TheScientist, click here.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-11-07--Weaponization of Weather and Climate

Weaponization of Weather and Climate

One of our nations most prominent and talented weather /climate experts , Joe Bastardi , has just published a book entitled The Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate War .
He frequents Sean Hannity ’ s Fox TV show as a resident expert so Sean , having learned so much from Joe , was kind enough to write the Forward .
In it he says : “ Joe has rightfully come to the conclusion that this ” phony war ” is a smoke screen to push another agenda——the destruction of the very system that made this nation successful .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to preserve life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness .
We fight not because we are unconcerned about the environment but because we believe a top-down system of government is deleterious .
The battle isn ’ t over climate change .
It ’ s over our way of life.
” Joe Bastardi makes exactly this case through his encyclopedic knowledge of weather and a passion for the topic since childhood .
His dad was a meteorologist and he had his own weather forecasting station at Penn State University by his junior year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arming him for the abuse he would take .
All of us who see the climate as beyond man ’ s control must put up with that abuse from a nation whose media and educators lean left .
We have no agenda , only science for support .
Joe uses science as few do in weather because he has a organization that is paid to forecast weather by companies whose economic future depends on it .
He would be a great and funny TV weather man whose 7 day forecasts are right only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be much better to bring back paying clients .
We all know today whenever a potentially damaging weather event occurs the alarmists , radical liberals all , quickly blame it on man-caused climate change .
More and more folks are beginning to laugh at the absurdity of it all .
It would be even more helpful were they to recognize , for example , that among the 10 worst flood disasters in the US , only two occurred after 1940 .
And that those who promote alarmism and sea level rise ignore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ building a mansion on Martha ’ s Vineyard 3 feet above sea level .
Most scientists rely on knowledge of the past to frame the future , but the alarmists ignore it on purpose .
No stretch of weather as extreme as that which occurred between the 1930s and 1960s has occurred since .
Be it Hurricanes , droughts , heat or cold they all were before our large increases of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere .
Climate alarmists know that there is something exciting weather wise happening somewhere every day and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about man ’ s role in worsening weather .
Below is a diagram that explains how unethical scientists choose only data to support their scare scenario .
When one looks at the trend line among all the data relating Variable A to Variable B only Trend line 1 can be correct , but choosing very selective data you can choose any trend you wish .
What the alarmists do not do is predict significant weather in real time where their forecasts can be judged as accurate or failures .
Your TV weather person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days out but recognizes he or she is just slightly better than 50 % beyond one week .
The real weather scientists like Joe Bastardi literally get paid to forecast weather for clients whose businesses depend on their accuracy .
The real climate/weather scientists learn how painful it is to be wrong when their livelihood depends on it .
But once the scars heal they are stronger for it .
They learn the lessons of humility and open mindedness and the fact that the atmosphere is a chaotic system .
They realize the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out with some mathematical equation .
Yet students are likely , when taking an Italian language class , to hear a Professor tell the class they “ have 20 years to visit Venice before it goes under water ” .
Yes this drivel is included even in language classes .
Joe Bastardi one of our best competing weather analysts does not have a Ph.D. in meteorology , but does has 45 years of experience putting his knowledge on the line about 3000 hours a year .
He finds it completely incredible that alarmists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a climate emergency which is worth spending trillions of dollars to attempt to thwart nature in some minuscule manner .
All this when the facts say we are experiencing a climate optimum .
Bastardi is not opposed to acting in opposition to nature when it makes sense .
That does not include affecting the temperature of the planet decades hence but does include attempting to reduce the furor of a hurricane by seeding it with chemicals to wring out some of its intensity before it hits populated costal areas .
We need more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provable fashions instead of the conn artists feeding at the government trough .

One of our nations most prominent and talented weather /climate experts, Joe Bastardi, has just published a book entitled The Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate War. He frequents Sean Hannity’s Fox TV show as a resident expert so Sean, having learned so much from Joe, was kind enough to write the Forward. In it he says:
“Joe has rightfully come to the conclusion that this”phony war” is a smoke screen to push another agenda——the destruction of the very system that made this nation successful. We fight not over the climate but to preserve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We fight not because we are unconcerned about the environment but because we believe a top-down system of government is deleterious. The battle isn’t over climate change. It’s over our way of life.”
Joe Bastardi makes exactly this case through his encyclopedic knowledge of weather and a passion for the topic since childhood. His dad was a meteorologist and he had his own weather forecasting station at Penn State University by his junior year where he was also a standout wrestler arming him for the abuse he would take. All of us who see the climate as beyond man’s control must put up with that abuse from a nation whose media and educators lean left. We have no agenda, only science for support. Joe uses science as few do in weather because he has a organization that is paid to forecast weather by companies whose economic future depends on it. He would be a great and funny TV weather man whose 7 day forecasts are right only 56% of the time but has to be much better to bring back paying clients.
We all know today whenever a potentially damaging weather event occurs the alarmists, radical liberals all, quickly blame it on man-caused climate change. More and more folks are beginning to laugh at the absurdity of it all. It would be even more helpful were they to recognize, for example, that among the 10 worst flood disasters in the US, only two occurred after 1940. And that those who promote alarmism and sea level rise ignore their own warnings like former President Obama building a mansion on Martha’s Vineyard 3 feet above sea level.
Most scientists rely on knowledge of the past to frame the future, but the alarmists ignore it on purpose. No stretch of weather as extreme as that which occurred between the 1930s and 1960s has occurred since. Be it Hurricanes, droughts, heat or cold they all were before our large increases of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Climate alarmists know that there is something exciting weather wise happening somewhere every day and they cherry pick them to scare the public about man’s role in worsening weather. Below is a diagram that explains how unethical scientists choose only data to support their scare scenario. When one looks at the trend line among all the data relating Variable A to Variable B only Trend line 1 can be correct , but choosing very selective data you can choose any trend you wish.
What the alarmists do not do is predict significant weather in real time where their forecasts can be judged as accurate or failures. Your TV weather person does a good job or a few days out but recognizes he or she is just slightly better than 50% beyond one week. The real weather scientists like Joe Bastardi literally get paid to forecast weather for clients whose businesses depend on their accuracy.
The real climate/weather scientists learn how painful it is to be wrong when their livelihood depends on it. But once the scars heal they are stronger for it. They learn the lessons of humility and open mindedness and the fact that the atmosphere is a chaotic system. They realize the futility of trying to predict climate decades out with some mathematical equation. Yet students are likely, when taking an Italian language class, to hear a Professor tell the class they “have 20 years to visit Venice before it goes under water”. Yes this drivel is included even in language classes.
Joe Bastardi one of our best competing weather analysts does not have a Ph.D. in meteorology, but does has 45 years of experience putting his knowledge on the line about 3000 hours a year. He finds it completely incredible that alarmists want to tell us we are approaching a climate emergency which is worth spending trillions of dollars to attempt to thwart nature in some minuscule manner. All this when the facts say we are experiencing a climate optimum.
Bastardi is not opposed to acting in opposition to nature when it makes sense. That does not include affecting the temperature of the planet decades hence but does include attempting to reduce the furor of a hurricane by seeding it with chemicals to wring out some of its intensity before it hits populated costal areas. We need more weather scientists who approach nature in realistic provable fashions instead of the conn artists feeding at the government trough.