Cure for cancer on the horizon?!

Wow…, that’s really big news, right?

I don’t know about you, but this seems like it would have garnered more news coverage than it has.

Especially since this claim is coming from the scientist who provided the first COVID-19 vaccine in an unbelievably short period of time, using the same type of methods she was in the process of developing a cancer treatment for!

We’re talking about Dr. Ozlem Tureci, here, the co-founder of the German company BioNTech.

Tureci, along with her husband, Ugur Sahin, were working on a way to use the body’s own immune system to attack tumors when they learned about the coronavirus last year, and chose to direct their focus towards developing a vaccine to combat the virus, using the same technology they had already been researching for over twenty years.    

Dr. Tureci was born in Germany, although her parents were originally from Turkey.

The quick delivery of the COVID vaccine was made possible by BioNTech’s partnership with pharmaceutical giants, Pfizer and Moderna.  

Dr. Tureci has been noted as saying, “The same principle can be applied to get the immune system to take on tumors, and we [already] have several different cancer vaccines based on mRNA.”

Dr. Tureci was asked when she felt these cancer vaccines might become available, and she responded, “That’s very difficult to predict in innovative development. But we expect that within only a couple of years, we will also have our vaccines against cancer at a place where we can offer them to people.”

“WE EXPECT THAT WITHIN ONLY A COUPLE OF YEARS, WE WILL ALSO HAVE OUR VACCINES AGAINST CANCER AT A PLACE WHERE WE CAN OFFER THEM TO PEOPLE!”

Again, I ask, how is this not being hailed as groundbreaking news around the world?

I guess good news, hopeful news, is not in vogue right now. 

If the news is not divisive or negative, the mainstream media has no time for it.  

Given the millions and millions of people who have already succumbed to cancer, as well as the millions of people fighting cancer as we speak, this news should at least offer some well-deserved hope.  

So, what makes the vaccines developed by Dr. Tureci so different?

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, “mRNA [messenger RiboNucleic Acid, a nucleic acid present in all living cells] vaccines [the type being worked on by Dr. Tureci] are a new type of vaccine to protect against infectious diseases. To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, they teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.”

“Beyond vaccines, cancer research has used mRNA to trigger the immune system to target specific cancer cells.”

According to Ryan Cross for Chemical & Engineering News, “Messenger RNA technology promises to turn our bodies into medicine-making factories. But first Moderna—and a long list of old and new competitors—needs to overcome some major scientific challenges.”

And, of course, some major monetary challenges as well.

In the case of the coronavirus vaccine, then President Trump pushed and incentivized Big Pharma via “Operation Warp Speed,” and put our money where his mouth was. We got a vaccine and they made a boatload of money.

It’s funny how billions and billions of dollars can grease the wheels of progress.

Whenever we are talking about “Big Pharma,” we are talking about BIG money. 

And money is their primary concern.

Make no mistake about it. 

Actually curing anything is a distance second.

In fact, they really don’t want to cure anything.  If you are cured of something, you don’t need to take any more medication…, and if you don’t need to take medications they don’t make any money…, so, the goal is to make us feel better without actually curing us.

“Why are we so passionate about messenger RNA?’ Moderna President Stephen Hoge asked.”

The profit potential?

Sorry.

‘“It starts with the question of life,’ he explained. ‘And in fact, all life that we know flows through messenger RNA. … In our language, mRNA is the software of life,’ Hoge said”

You can call it whatever you want, Mr. Hoge, but let’s all hope Dr. Tureci’s prediction is accurate…, and that Big Pharma finds curing cancer a profitable enough of a venture, for all of our sakes.  

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.  I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Were there giants among us?

Here’s one for your “Forbidden Archaeology” file. 

Scientists are remaining stubbornly silent about a lost race of giants found in some burial mounds near Lake Delavan, Wisconsin, in May 1912, among other places.  

The dig site at Lake Delavan (about 30 miles southwest of Milwaukee) was overseen by Beloit College, at the time, and it included more than 200 burial mounds that proved to be classic examples of 8th century Woodland Culture (That’s 1,200-1,300 years ago.). But the enormous size of the skeletons and strangely shaped skulls found in May of 1912 did not fit very neatly into anyone’s idea of a “normal” group of people. These “people” were enormous. These were not average human beings.

First reported in the May 4, 1912 issue of the New York Times, the 18 skeletons found by the Peterson brothers on Lake Lawn Farm in southeast Wisconsin exhibited several strange features.

Their heights ranged between 7 and 10 feet and their skulls “presumably those of men, are much larger than the heads of any race which inhabit America today.”

They tend to have a double row of teeth, 6 fingers and 6 toes.  The teeth in the front of the jaw are like regular molars.

Are these the giants the Bible and many other civilizations have in their history books? The Bible in Genesis 6:4 says, “There were giants [called the Nephilim] in the earth in those days; and also after that…”

Over 200 “Giant digs” have been found in recent years. Giant skeleton finds have not made the local/national news since the 1950’s for the most part, however.

Was this some sort of prank, a hoax played by local farm boys or a demented taxidermist for fun and the attention of the press?

The answer is no.

The Lake Delavan find of May 1912 was only one of dozens and dozens of similar finds that were reported in local newspapers from 1851 forward to the present day. It was not even the first set of giant skeletons found in Wisconsin.

On August 10, 1891, the New York Times reported that scientists from the Smithsonian Institution had discovered several large “pyramid type monuments” near Lake Mills, which is close to Madison, Wisconsin. “Madison, in ancient times, was the center of a large population of 200,000 or more,” the Times said. The excavators found an elaborate system of mounds which they named Fort Aztalan.

On December 20, 1897, the Times followed up with a report on three large burial mounds that had been discovered in Maple Creek, Wisconsin. One had recently been opened.

“In it was found the skeleton of a man of gigantic size. The bones measured from head to foot over nine feet and were in a fair state of preservation. The skull was as large as a half bushel measure. Some finely tempered rods of copper and other relics were lying near the bones.”

Giant skulls and skeletons of a race of “Goliaths” have been found on a very regular basis throughout the Midwestern states for more than 100 years. Giants have been found in Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky and New York, and their burial sites are similar to the other well-known mounds.

So, why hasn’t more been made of these giants? 

If the “scientists” can’t explain something we just hide it away and pretend it never happened?

The spectrum of Mound builder history spans a period of more than 5,000 years (from 3400 BC to the 16th Century AD (1500s)), a period greater than the history of Ancient Egypt and all of its dynasties.

Most historians and scientists believe that we have enough historical understanding of the people who lived in North America during this period. 

I guess at least some of the “people.”

However, the long record of unexplained finds like those at Lake Delavan suggests otherwise.

Has there been a “giant” cover-up, in more ways than one? 

Why aren’t there public displays of gigantic Native American skeletons at natural history museums?

Is it because these giants don’t fit the narrative that the “experts” want to feed us?

The skeletons of some Mound Builders are certainly on display.

The keyword here is “some.”

There is a wonderful exhibit, for example, at the Aztalan State Park where we can nsee the skeleton of a “Princess of Aztalan” in the museum.  But the skeletons placed on display are normal-sized.

Specifically, the Smithsonian Institution has been accused of making a deliberate effort to hide the “telling of the bones” and to keep the giant skeletons locked away.

In the words of Vine Deloria, a Native American author and professor of law:

“Modern day archaeology and anthropology have nearly sealed the door on our imaginations.  Hiding away anything unusual.  The nineteenth century (1800s) Smithsonian Institution, created a one-way street, down which uncounted bones have been spirited. This door and the contents of its vault are virtually sealed off to anyone, but government officials.”

Why are things constantly being hidden from us by our own government?  

The January 13th, 1870 edition of the Wisconsin Decatur Republican reported that two giant, well-preserved skeletons of an unknown race were discovered near Potosi, WI by workers digging the foundation of a saw mill near the bank of the Mississippi river. One skeleton measured seven-and-a-half feet, the other eight feet. The skulls of each had prominent cheek bones and double rows of teeth. A large collection of arrowheads and “strange toys” were found buried with the remains.

A giant skeleton was also unearthed outside of West Bend (just northwest of Milwaukee) near Lizard Mound County Park and assembled by local farmers to a height of eight feet.

According to Lisa Trank, for Gaia, “While the existence of dinosaurs is largely accepted, and millions of people travel across continents to marvel at majestic, larger than life monuments, the facts about human giants, or giant races, are much debated. Regardless of whether they are dismissed as myth or accepted as fact, giants represent important aspects of our individual and collective psyche. They capture our imagination, appear in religious texts, and drive scientific endeavor. But the question still remains — did giants once roam the Earth?”

It seems that is not the question that remains, however.

The real question that remains is why are we not “allowed” acknowledge that these giants actually existed?

Evidence of Giants: Discovered, Disregarded, and Discarded

“In the mid-1800s, a flurry of activity emerged across North America in the fields of archeology and anthropology, triggered in part by the discovery of the Chickasawba tribal burial mounds of Oklahoma, in which were found human bones seven feet and longer in length. In fact, during the years ranging from the late 1800’s all the way to the 1990s, over 1,000 reports of giant-sized human skeleton remains were found across North America. These stories were met by the general public with curiosity and an increased appetite for the possibility that giants once roamed the country.”

“In the United States, this period of archeological discovery took place during the Manifest Destiny period, which began in 1845 and was highlighted by rapid and aggressive territorial growth. A Puritan-led religious fervor fueled expansion across the West; Native Americans were looked upon as heathens, to be converted, civilized, or eliminated. Discoveries of ancient, pre-New World giant races directly contradicted the Manifest Destiny’s ideals of white racial, religious, and ethnic superiority; it was common for giant skeletal remains to be confiscated and destroyed.”

“According to Richard Dewhurst, author of ‘The Ancient Giants Who Ruled America,’ The Smithsonian Institute, then in its early stages of establishment, administered the Manifest Destiny philosophy through the Powell Doctrine, named after John Wesley Powell, the first bureau head of the Smithsonian Department of Ethnology. The doctrine reflected the isolationist mindset of the times and mandated that no archeological or anthropological research would include mention of ancient tribal cultures. Despite the documented existence of ethnology reports stating that the Smithsonian was in possession of giant human remains, none can be found today.”

You mean none will be allowed to be found.

“Ancient traditions overflow with legends of giants — St. Christopher, Goliath, the Nephilim, Gilgamesh, Viracocha, Sasquatch, and more, across continents, languages, and landscapes. Old Testament accounts of the Nephilim, a biblical race of giants and demigods, stated that they were so large they made the Israelites feel like, ‘Grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.’ (Numbers 13: 28-33). The Paiute myth of Si-Te-Cah, is a tale of a giant tribe of cannibals who were eventually destroyed. This is similar to the myth of the first people created by Viracocha, the ancient Inca god, who he destroyed because of their uncontrollable and unruly behavior.”

“Carol Rose, the author of Giants, Monsters, and Dragons: An Encyclopedia of Folklore, Legend, and Myth, writes that giants ‘exist beyond the realm of human order and had to be controlled, banished, or defeated,’ and were considered ‘destructive entities.’

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.   I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Following the Science?

For how long and how many times have we heard the liberals decry, “We have to follow the Science?”

Well, apparently, “following the Science” is only a popular liberal catch phrase which is trotted out when it suits their intentions and their politics.

Democrats (blue state governors in particular) have used the China virus as a means to impose a wide range of impositions on our Constitutional freedoms in the name of safety.  

Some based on “following the Science,” and some not so much.  

Usually only when it was politically convenient.

Dr. Richard Besser, for Fox News, says that, “Despite coronavirus, science is NOT telling us to close schools.”

But how could that be?!

We MUST “follow the Science,” right?!

“Sound science, like the coronavirus itself, is apolitical. Most everything else this year — including decisions on whether to close schools — is not.”

I think if we’ve learned anything these last four years, it’s that nothing is apolitical anymore.

Nothing.

“As the pandemic enters its deadliest phase to date, government leaders and school districts are having to make extraordinarily difficult decisions about whether to continue in-person learning amid record communitywide surges in cases, hospitalizations and deaths.”

Excuse me, but these aren’t “extraordinarily difficult decisions” at all.

The Teachers’ Union has made those decisions for our illustrious political “leaders.”  

“New York City’s decision to close schools indefinitely, and the decision in my home state of New Jersey to allow school districts to keep them open, offers a stark contrast in how the two states with the highest death rates for COVID-19 are managing this crisis.”

“As a pediatrician and a parent, I understand the fear, confusion, and even anger that parents and caregivers face today as policymakers grapple with school decisions.”

Can’t you just envision those policymakers “grappling” with those school decisions into the wee hours of the morning?!

“We know that being in the classroom benefits children socially, emotionally and academically.”

Oh, yeah…, so, what’s the problem?

Isn’t it all about the kids?

Of course it’s not.

Huge numbers of these kids have been thrown out with the trash by these supposed caring liberals.

Many of these kids depend on school for at least one or two decent meals each day.

“On the other hand, virtual learning can be a sound option — and when transmission rates rise to unsafe levels, a necessary one — if a student has a computer, a good Internet connection, a quiet workspace, and no special learning needs. For millions of families without these luxuries, however, it’s an unworkable burden and educational disadvantage that many children could bear for a lifetime.”

Ya…, “It’s an unworkable burden and educational disadvantage that many children could bear for a lifetime,” but it’s a sacrifice the liberals and the Teachers’ unions are willing to bear for them on their behalf.  

“From a health perspective, it appears that most children fare well if infected, but they can still spread the coronavirus to higher-risk people in their homes, communities and yes, schools. But when schools have the necessary resources and follow strict protocols, in-person learning has worked remarkably well without accelerating community spread.”

Not according to the teachers, apparently.

“Knowing this, we should do all we can to keep kids in school by providing the funds for proper staffing, equipment, protective gear and ventilation systems. Without these supports, we cannot expect schools to remain open.”

Ok, there we go…, we just need to provide more funding.

We should all know by now that it’s always about the money.

The current CDC Director, Robert R. Redfield, says, “Schools are among the safest places kids can be.”

I guess he isn’t considered to have anything to do with “Science.”

“Achievement gaps could be exacerbated when students are out of school, placing yet another burden on children of color.”

“However, the science and data now tell us a much more nuanced story, and we must adapt as new information arrives. That is the fundamental value of rapid learning during a crisis. With differing approaches, schools have shown that safe in-person learning is possible.”

“That’s why New York City’s decision last week to close schools seems to be a case of following a rigid plan written before we knew schools could remain open safely. The city’s test-positive threshold of 3% — established well before the school year began — has been eclipsed, triggering closures. Yet a mere 0.23% of students in the city’s public schools have tested positive. In fact, New York schools have been a pandemic success story.”

“Governors nationwide are under pressure to follow New York’s lead and close schools, no matter what the data shows. With nearly 200,000 cases a day being reported in the U.S., some of those cases will undoubtedly be teachers, students and staff.”

Why would governors nationwide be under any kind of pressure to follow New York’s lead?

The state of New York, New York City, Governor Cuomo and Mayor DeBlasio have the worst COVID record of any state in the nation.

So, “the Pressure” is on other governors to follow their political lead, not their successful dealing with the virus lead.

Just so we’re clear about that.  

“However, decisions on school closures should be driven by data on transmission linked to schools and not on anecdotes or outdated metrics. Public pressure, I fear, is going to make it increasingly difficult in the weeks ahead for governors to stick to the science-based guidance on school closures.”

“Science-based guidance?”

And “public pressure” has no effect on these slimy democrats anymore.

Their friends, the fake news, liberal propaganda, media will just ignore and spin “the pressure” whichever way they want.   

“In the spring, New Jersey was among the hardest hit per capita by COVID-19, with the nation’s highest death rate. But this fall, New Jersey schools have not been the problem. The state’s governor, Phil Murphy, issued a joint statement with six other Northeast governors last week that said in part: ‘In-person learning is the best possible scenario for children, especially those with special needs and from low-income families.’”

“That’s the crux of why we need to do all we can to keep children in schools. The pandemic has disproportionately impacted Black, Latino and Native American communities with dramatically higher rates of infections, hospitalizations and deaths.”

Where is Black Lives Matter on this issue?

Where are any of the democrats on this issue?

Oh, I forgot…, the election is over, so the democrats can go back to ignoring any of the issues affecting the Black, Latino and Native American communities. 

Just sayin’.  

“Because of the inequitable way schools are funded in much of America, (And whose fault is that?) achievement gaps could be exacerbated when students are out of school, placing yet another burden on children of color at the very moment when our nation is forging a new path forward based on racial equity and justice.”

“We know, too, that education is just one facet of what our schools provide. Many families — especially those with parents working full-time, one-parent households, and low-income households — also rely on schools for healthy meals, technology support, and before- and after-hours child care.”

“The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the perversion of our national priorities. We need to treat teachers and school staff like the indispensable front-line workers they are and support them as such.”

I think we are, aren’t we?

The teachers appear to be the ones who aren’t comfortable being front-line workers.

Yes, “The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the perversion of our national priorities,” but the “perversions” are much more far reaching than the good doctor understands, or is willing to acknowledge.

“At the same time, we must reject the false choice that we either sacrifice teachers or do harm to our children. In the next critical months, we must come together and follow the science so that the greatest public health crisis in a century doesn’t also become an educational crisis.”

Uh…, the “educational crisis” is already here, and has been here for quite a while already.

Dr. Richard Besser, a pediatrician, is president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, America’s largest health philanthropy, based in Princeton, N.J. He serves on the New Jersey Restart and Recovery Commission. He was acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) during the H1N1 pandemic in 2009. Follow him on Twitter: @DrRichBesserio 

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.   I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Is Science a Religion?

In my opinion, the belief in Science, per se, is not a “religion,” although to many people, Science has become their “religion.”

When we think of “Science,” we think of things that can be proven…, we think of facts.

Science is good, Science is helpful, Science is a necessity in our lives.

When we think of “Religion,” we think of a belief system that requires us to have faith in something that we can’t necessarily prove.

It can also be said that Religion is good, Religion is helpful, and that Religion is a necessity in our lives. 

From time to time I hear people, who supposedly are supposed to know something, smugly disregard those of us who believe in God, and mock the fact that we believe in something that can’t be scientifically proven.

Ok…, challenge accepted.

Let’s take a look then at what these people of Science choose to believe.

Let’s start our examination at the beginning, which is always a good place to start.

According to most astrophysicists, and according to NASA scientists, “’The big bang’ is how astronomers explain the way the universe began. It is the idea that the universe began as just a single point, then expanded and stretched to grow as large as it is right now (and it could still be stretching).”

We should add that “The big bang” is technically a theory at this point…, which means it has not been “proven.”

So, anyway, in the beginning there was nothing.

That, in itself, is hard to imagine. 

Then there was this single point of super, super, super-condensed matter.  I’ve heard this “point” described as the size of a pin head to the size of a pea, and ALL of the matter that exists is the universe now was compacted into this “point.”

So, where did this “pea” come from?

I guess, scientifically, that’s neither here nor there.

Then, inexplicably, this “pea” decided to explode.

BANG!

Although, technically, in space, there would be no sound.

Anyway, as a result of this exploded “pea” rippling out into the nothingness, our universe, and everything in it, was created.

Then after, supposedly, millions or trillions of years, our sun created itself, as did all of the planets in our solar system…, our own planet Earth being one of them.

Additionally, according to NASA, “How long did all of this take? Well, we now know that the universe is 13,800,000,000 years old—that’s 13.8 billion. That is a very long time.”

The real fact of the matter is NASA “knows” no such thing.  The age of our universe is at best a guess on their part.

Anyway, then, supposedly, more millions and millions of years pass by.

Then, in a puddle of primordial “soup,” containing just the right elements, which was laying around somewhere along a prehistoric sea, “life” was “born” in the essence of a single celled organism.

Now that is incredibly, incredibly, incredibly easier said than done.

Please keep in mind that a cell, even a single cell, is an extremely, extremely, extremely complex organism.

There must have been more than one, however, because in order to make the jump from a single cell organism to more complex organisms, we need multi-cell organisms to exist.

According to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, ScienceMag.org, and Elizabeth Pennisi, “The momentous transition to multicellular life may not have been so hard after all.”

Really?

“Billions of years ago, life crossed a threshold. Single cells started to band together, and a world of formless, unicellular life was on course to evolve into the riot of shapes and functions of multicellular life today, from ants to pear trees to people. It’s a transition as momentous as any in the history of life, and until recently we had no idea how it happened.”

You really still don’t, but I digress.

“The gulf between unicellular and multicellular life seems almost unbridgeable. A single cell’s existence is simple and limited. Like hermits, microbes need only be concerned with feeding themselves; neither coordination nor cooperation with others is necessary, though some microbes occasionally join forces. In contrast, cells in a multicellular organism, from the four cells in some algae to the 37 trillion in a human, give up their independence to stick together tenaciously; they take on specialized functions, and they curtail their own reproduction for the greater good, growing only as much as they need to fulfill their functions.”

And they just all decided to do this why?

And how exactly did these organisms “feed themselves?”

If these were the only living organisms on the planet, either they were cannibals or they ate rocks. 

Just sayin’.

Then millions of more years pass by before more complex creatures “created” themselves, with one organism eventually deciding to crawl out of the sea and live on land for some reason.

Then over a million years here and a million years there, this creature evolved into a human and we were off and running!

Taa daa!  

So, these people really believe that all of this just happened by accident, all on its own?

Now, I understand that if you don’t want to accept that there is a God, you have to come up with some kind of explanation as to how we and everything else got here, but this is the best you could come up with?

I mean, seriously. 

If you honestly stand back and take a look at this theory of macro-evolution (nobody disputes that micro-evolution occurs), you would have to admit that it would seem to take a lot more faith to buy-in to this “scientific” explanation of how everything came to be, than to believe there is a master creator and designer who is responsible.

So, yes…, at least in this regard, you would have to say that “Science” is some peoples’ Religion.  

If any of our “scientific” friends out there feel I have misrepresented your “scientific” belief of how the universe and life as we know it came about, please leave me a comment(s) as to where or what I am wrong about and I will publish a blog with your responses in it, or give you equal time if you choose to elaborate further.

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.   I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Dinosaurs explained!?

Did you ever wonder why so many prehistoric animals and plants were so big?

Traditional science and scientists really don’t offer a credible explanation in my mind.

Karen Kirkpatrick, for the “Howstuffworks” website, admits that the reason why so many of these prehistoric creatures were so big, “is something of a mystery [to Science].”

I think what she really means is, “Science” is having a hard time coming up with a reason to explain the prehistoric organisms while not being viewed as agreeing with The Bible.   

Additionally, if you believe in The Bible, did you ever wonder why people lived so long prior to Noah’s flood?  

Well, here is my belief, which I have come to after considering many sources.

The basis of my belief comes from The Bible.

The Bible says, in the book of Genesis (from The King James Version):  

1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

Verses 6-8 specifically describe an environment that would be conducive to organisms being able to grow much bigger and live much longer, than within the environment in which we exist now (after the flood).

It seems pretty clear to me that verses 6-8 describe an Earth with water on the surface of the planet, a layer of water surrounding the planet, and an atmosphere, or sky, in-between them.

This configuration would create a type of greenhouse, and an air pressure, which could be compared to the environment in a bariatric chamber.    

 

From https://www.british-israel.us/index.php:

“A 50-inch-wingspan dragonfly fossil was found in Italy. Today they are limited in size by the amount of oxygen and the air pressure. They breathe through their skin. Bugs growing in oxygen-rich environments grow up to 1,000 times heavier than those living today! If an animal increases in size, it has less surface area compared to its volume. This is why huge insects couldn’t breathe in today’s atmosphere.”

“But fossil insects are huge!”

“Cockroaches over 18 inches long have been found in the fossil record.”

“A fossil centipede 8.5 feet long was found.”

“Fossil grasshoppers have been found over two feet long. A giant tarantula fossil was found with a three-foot leg span.”

“Fossil cattails have been found 60 feet tall.”

“Fossil buffalo horns have been found with a 12-foot span. Giant elk with 12-foot antlers. A giant pre-historic goose stood as tall as an elephant and weighed up to half a ton. Salamanders grew 6 feet long. Sharks before the Flood were 80 feet long. Turtles bigger than men. Oyster shells have been found on the tops of mountains of Peru two miles above sea level 11.5 feet wide. Reptiles never stop growing. They grow throughout their entire lives (Holt Earth Science, 1991, p.293).”

A key to understanding the Pre-Flood Earth is the existence of a canopy of water in the stratosphere.

“After Noah’s Flood this water canopy in the stratosphere was removed, and the water became part of the waters of the Flood of Noah, approximately 4,400 years ago. The water canopy in the stratosphere is therefore no longer present.”

“The water canopy originally provided protection against cosmic radiation from outer space.”

“The Water layer in the Stratosphere had several other very important functions.”

“The temperature was probably much warmer, with no variation of temperature over the entire planet because of the greenhouse effect of the vapor canopy in the stratosphere. This perhaps explains why Mammoths preserved in the permafrost in Siberia have tropical vegetation in their stomachs.”

“One of the very important functions of the upper atmosphere today is that much of the dangerous radiation from the sun is filtered out. However, some dangerous radiation still gets through to the surface of the Earth. This is why, for example, overexposure to sunlight can cause skin cancer.”

“The blocking of dangerous X-rays and gamma rays would probably have been much greater before the Flood. This probably accounts for the much longer life spans of the patriarchs recorded in the Bible (some over 900 years).”

“Genesis 2:5-6 indicates that at least prior to the creation of Adam, rain did not fall but that the plants were nourished by springs coming up out of the ground. The Bible does not actually mention rain until the Flood, and a canopy providing a greenhouse effect could have lessened the need for the water cycle. If Noah was the first person to see a rainbow, that would add further strength to the canopy theory.”

“Genesis 7:11-12 tells us it rained for forty days and nights. Such a lengthy deluge would be impossible today because there isn’t nearly enough moisture in the present atmosphere; therefore, there had to be much more water in the heavens of Noah’s time.”

“A canopy would have provided an increased atmospheric pressure, heavier air in other words, that would have allowed the prehistoric flying reptiles such as the pteranodon to have taken flight. It is doubtful that these creatures would be able to fly in today’s thinner atmosphere.”

“The water canopy in the stratosphere would have dramatically increased the partial pressure of gases on Planet Earth, causing 50% higher concentrations of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide. This is proved in experiments on Pre-Flood air trapped in fossilized tree sap, now known as the semi-precious stone, Amber.”

“According to Time Magazine, November 9, 1987, p. 82, bubbles of air in Amber have an oxygen content that is 50% higher than the present atmospheric air.”

“According to this article in Time Magazine, Geochemists Gary Landis of the US Geological Survey and Robert Berner of Yale analyzed tiny air bubbles trapped in specimens of Amber.”

“They placed the Amber specimens inside a vacuum chamber, and then opened the Amber, allowing the ancient trapped gases to escape. They found that the air contained 32% oxygen, which is much higher than our current 21% oxygen content in the atmosphere.”

“This finding is confirmed in The New Scientist Magazine published on March 11, 2000. According to this article the air trapped in Amber has 35% oxygen.”

“These findings confirm that Planet Earth had much higher Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide levels at an earlier date, and would seem to confirm the theory about higher Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere, caused by the water canopy before Noah’s Flood.”

“Because of the higher oxygen levels, the high blood oxygen levels would have contributed to extreme longevity, resistance to bacterial and viral diseases, and greater metabolic efficiency, with consequent greatly enhanced athletic ability.”

“The average recorded life span in The Bible of the early patriarchs is 912 years. This is in stark contrast to today’s much shorter life spans, with 70-80 years being typical.”

“In the Pre-Flood atmosphere the Carbon Dioxide content was much higher because of the canopy of water. This high Carbon Dioxide content caused the vegetation, to grow much larger, and also more abundantly.

Now I’m no scientist, but I’m not stupid either.

Doesn’t this sound like a theory that makes sense, while offering an explanation for dinosaurs and the other fossils we find today?

Until I learn something that would make me think otherwise, this is my story and I’m sticking to it!

If this article piqued your interest, you may want to check out my blog from July 18, 2018, titled, “Many scientists don’t seem to believe in God…, but God created science!  Take Noah’s flood, ‘The Great Flood,’ for example.”

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please let me know by “clicking” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts. 

We’re all entitled to our opinions.  I value yours and your feedback as well.

I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Is this real UFO evidence?

Is this evidence of “a new enemy that could fly from pole to pole at incredible speeds,” according to Admiral Richard Byrd?

Harry Pettit, for “The Sun,” and republished in the New York Post, reports, “An incredible cloud phenomenon appearing to stretch thousands of miles across the Earth has sent conspiracy theorists into a frenzy.”

I would argue that not just “conspiracy theorists” were sent “into a frenzy,” but some scientists and “experts” were sent into a frenzy trying to explain away this strange phenomenon.

“The cloud resembles a contrail emitted by an airplane but is much longer, seemingly reaching from pole to pole,” Pettit continued.

“It was spotted this week [back in March of 2019] by an eagle-eyed space fan watching a public live feed from the International Space Station.”

Typical contrails dissipate in the atmosphere in about 30 minutes or less, however, which means the object, or craft, that created this 13,000 mile, intact contrail, would have had to have been traveling at a speed roughly 10 times faster than the fastest aircraft currently known to exist on the planet.

“The mysterious clip was later uploaded to YouTube, baffling conspiracy nuts.”

Please note…, “conspiracy nuts” are only “conspiracy nuts” until the conspiracy is proven to exist…, then we discover we had been dealing with “cover-up nuts!”

It’s all a matter of perspective.

The U.S. Navy has confirmed, with its recent UFO admissions, that many of these “nuts” weren’t so nutty after all.

Pettit continues by saying, “But it turns out the strange line has a far simpler explanation. The line is simply a rare form of cloud.”

Oh…, okay, it’s just a cloud.

Well, that takes care of that.

It’s simply a thin cloud that stretches in a perfectly straight line for 13,000 miles!

I don’t think there’s anything simple about that explanation, nor anything correct either!

“David Schultz, a Professor of Synoptic Meteorology at the University of Manchester, said he believes a low-pressure storm is responsible.”

‘“It looks like the back edge of a cloud associated with an extratropical cyclone, i.e. a low-pressure system. It’s unusual, but it is real,’ he said.”

Excuse me Professor Schulz, but that ain’t no cloud!

Not even an “unusual” cloud, or a “rare form of a cloud.”

There is no cloud, nor will there ever be a cloud, that spans 13,000 miles, from pole to pole, halfway around the globe.

You’re giving crappy “professors” a bad name all around the world.

“It appears to stretch across a massive portion of the Earth because of a trick of the light.”

‘“Combined with the camera’s perspective, this is making you think there is a very large shadow covering a big chunk of the earth,’ a spokesman said.”

Yes, folks…, don’t believe your own eyes.

It’s all just a big light trick.

“The perspective trick makes the cloud appear ‘farther and straighter’ than the image would have you believe, he added.”

Is that the same type of trick that would have us believe you’re more intelligent than we are just because the title of “professor” is in front of your name?

Doesn’t this sound like the tired, old, government explanations for UFOs like swamp gas, weather balloons, military flares, atmospheric anomalies, optical illusions, etc.?

Pettit concludes by saying, “Looks like it’s tough luck for conspiracy fans, although perhaps it’s comforting to know a UFO wasn’t blitzing across our skies.”

I would say, “No Mr. Pettit, I would say it’s tough luck for people like you who are willing to accept these lame explanations and be perfectly happy to go on, wallowing in your own ignorance.

Now, getting back to my earlier Admiral Byrd reference, and how this “cloud phenomenon” may support claims by Admiral Byrd made over 70 years ago.

Based on information from The History Channel and from the Galnet website, “An extraordinary 2006 Russian documentary was recently translated into English revealing new information about a US Navy Antarctica expedition in 1946 and 1947.”

“Originally scheduled for a six-month period, the scientific expedition was officially called The United States Navy Antarctic Development Program, and given the operational name ‘Highjump.’ The naval component of Operation ‘Highjump’ was known as Task Force 68 and was comprised of 4,700 military personnel, one aircraft carrier (the USS Philippine Sea, among the largest of all carriers of the time), and a number of naval support ships and aircraft.”

This was no small operation.

President Harry Truman had personally picked Byrd to lead this operation, but he was no stranger to special assignments.

Rear Admiral Richard Byrd was an American naval officer and explorer. He was a recipient of the Medal of Honor, the highest honor for valor given by the United States, and was a pioneering American aviator, polar explorer, and organizer of polar logistics. Aircraft flights in which he served as a navigator and expedition leader crossed the Atlantic Ocean, a segment of the Arctic Ocean, and a segment of the Antarctic Plateau. His expeditions had been the first to reach both the North Pole and the South Pole by air.

Admiral Byrd had a distinguished career dating back to World War I, on through World War II, and in the following years as well.

Admiral Byrd had been recognized by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Herbert Hoover as well.

Byrd was highly respected, highly decorated, and an officer held in the highest regard.  Please keep that in mind when reading about this particular adventure.

“This Naval expedition [Operation Highjump] was headed by famed polar explorer Admiral Richard Byrd, who had been ordered to consolidate and extend American sovereignty over the largest practical area of the Antarctic continent.”

“Byrd’s expedition ended after only 8 weeks with many fatalities according to initial news reports based on interviews with crew members who spoke to the press while passing through Chilean ports. Rather than deny the heavy casualty reports, Admiral Byrd revealed in a press      interview that ‘TASK FORCE 68 HAD ENCOUNTERED A NEW ENEMY THAT COULD FLY FROM POLE TO POLE AT INCREDIBLE SPEEDS.’”

“Admiral Byrd’s statements were published in the Chilean Press but never publicly confirmed by US authorities. Indeed, Byrd did not speak again to the Press about Operation Highjump, leaving it for researchers to speculate for decades over what really happened, and why Byrd was silenced.”

“After the Soviet collapse in 1991, the KGB released previously classified files that cast light on the mysterious Byrd led Naval expedition to Antarctica. A 2006 Russian documentary, recently translated, made public for the first time a 1947 secret Soviet intelligence report commissioned by Joseph Stalin of Task 68’s mission to Antarctica.”

“The intelligence report revealed that the US Navy had sent the military expedition to find and destroy a hidden Nazi base. On the way, they encountered a mysterious UFO force that attacked the military expedition destroying several ships and a significant number of planes!”

What?!

“It is a historical fact that Nazi Germany devoted significant resources to the exploration of Antarctica, and established a prewar presence there with its first mission in the Antarctic summer of 1938. According to a statement by Grand Admiral Donitz in 1943, ‘The German submarine fleet is proud of having built for the Fuhrer, in another part of the world, a Shangri-La land, an impregnable fortress.’”

“If the fortress was in Antarctica, was it built by the Nazis, or discovered there? After the defeat of Nazi Germany, according to various sources, elite Nazi scientists and leaders escaped to this impregnable fortress by U-boats, two of which experienced difficulties and surrendered in Argentina.”

“In the Soviet intelligence report, never before known testimony by two US Navy servicemen with Operation Highjump was revealed. A recent article in ‘New Dawn’ by Frank Joseph gives a detailed analysis of the two eyewitness accounts, only the latter of which was mentioned in the 2006 Russian documentary. John P. Szehwach, a radioman stationed on the USS Brownson, gave testimony of how UFOs appeared dramatically out of the ocean depths. On January 17, 1947 at 0700 hours, Szehwach said:”

‘“I and my shipmates in the pilothouse port side observed for several minutes the bright lights that ascended about 45 degrees into the sky very quickly We couldn’t i.d. the lights because our radar was limited to 250 miles in a straight line.’”

“Over the next several weeks, according to the Soviet report, the UFOs flew close over the US naval flotilla which fired on the UFOs which did retaliate with deadly effects. According to Lieutenant John Sayerson, a flying boat pilot:”

‘“The thing shot vertically out of the water at tremendous velocity, as though pursued by the devil, and flew between the masts [of the ship] at such a high speed that the radio antenna oscillated back and forth in its turbulence. An aircraft [a Martin flying-boat] from the Currituck that took off just a few moments later was struck with an unknown type of ray from the object, and almost instantly crashed into the sea near our vessel. About ten miles away, the torpedo-boat Maddox burst into flames and began to sink. Having personally witnessed this attack by the object that flew out of the sea, all I can say is, it was frightening.”

“The destructive technology used by the UFOs in the Soviet intelligence report was not something that had been developed by the defeated Nazis, who had only shortly before been forced to retreat to the South Atlantic. It appears the UFOs were not intent on destroying Task Force 68, but forcing it to turn back. Were the UFOs protecting the retreating Nazis and/or their own presence in Antarctica?”

“This suggests that Admiral Byrd’s initial press report was accurate that ‘a new enemy that could fly from pole to pole at incredible speeds had emerged.’ Most importantly, the UFO force had inflicted heavy casualties on the US Navy that was powerless to oppose it. The world’s first known battle between the United States military and an unknown UFO fleet based near Antarctica very likely occurred in 1947, and the general public has never learned about it until now.”

Believe it or not!

But now, we do have that photographic evidence of a 13,000 mile long contrail, which would seem to back-up Admiral Byrd’s claims.

As long as the government can continue to convince people to not believe their own eyes, I guess they’ll be able to continue to side step the truth.

 

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

We’re all entitled to our opinions.  I value yours and your feedback as well.

I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

No oxygen? No problem!

According to David Aaro of Fox News, “Researchers on Monday said they found the first animal out of millions of known species that can survive its entire life without oxygen.”

anooxygen 2

The Henneguya salminicola (H. salminicola) normally lives in the muscle of its salmon host. The 10-celled creature has evolved to the point where it doesn’t breathe at all, according to a study published in the National Academy of Sciences.”

anooxygen 3

‘“Aerobic respiration was thought to be ubiquitous [“present, appearing, or found everywhere,” for all of you hillbillies out there like me] in animals, but now we confirmed that this is not the case,’ said Dorothée Huchon, a zoologist at Israel’s Tel Aviv University in a press release. ‘Our discovery shows that evolution can go in strange directions. Aerobic respiration is a major source of energy, and yet we found an animal that gave up this critical pathway.’”

anooxygen 4

Okay, doc…, I may not have known what “ubiquitous” means, but I’m smart enough to not assume this animal “gave up” its ability to breathe via some reverse evolution process.

I’m also honest enough to admit it when I don’t know something.

The possibility that this creature was designed and created this way is not even considered.

This is just another example which shows these scientists don’t know everything, and actually they know very little in the grand scheme of things.  They don’t even know what they don’t know!

“The new discovery could impact a common understanding between scientists that multicellular life needs oxygen to live on Earth.”

I would say it definitely does “impact a common understanding between scientists that multicellular life needs oxygen to live on Earth,” or anywhere else for that matter.

“Using deep sequencing approaches, the study found the H. salminicola has no mitochondrial DNA — normally containing the genes for respiration — which means the parasite ‘lost the ability to perform aerobic cellular respiration.’”

Excuse me, but no, it doesn’t mean “the parasite lost the ability to perform aerobic cellular respiration.” It means the parasite has no “ability to perform aerobic cellular respiration,” or just doesn’t need to.

Why do these “scientists” always have to interject their evolutionary biases into everything.

It’s not just me…, you can see this as well, right?

“It’s not clear how the H. salminicola survives without oxygen, but Huchon — who led the study — said it might be taking energy from the fish. He added that the parasite’s anaerobic traits were an accidental discovery.”

‘“It’s not yet clear to us how the parasite generates energy,’ Huchon said. ‘It may be drawing it from the surrounding fish cells, or it may have a different type of respiration such as oxygen-free breathing…it has shed unnecessary genes responsible for aerobic respiration and become an even simpler organism.’”

“The parasite is a myxozoan relative of jellyfish and corals that reportedly causes disease or cysts in the flesh of its salmon host, but is harmless to humans.”

Excuse me if I take that “harmless to humans” part with a grain of salt.

“Mitochondrial respiration has been an ancient characteristic of multi-cell organisms on our planet. Every cell in our bodies except red blood cells has large numbers of mitochondria, according to science alert.”

“They are essential for breaking down oxygen to produce adenosine which provides energy to drive many processes in living cells.”

“A few single-cell organisms lost the ability for aerobic respiration, but never in animals, the study said.”

‘“It is generally thought that during evolution, organisms become more and more complex, and that simple single-celled or few-celled organisms are the ancestors of complex organisms,’ Huchon concluded. ‘But here, right before us, is an animal whose evolutionary process is the opposite.’”

So when we discover a creature that flies in the face of the “evolutionary process” [macro-evolution that is], they don’t question the validity of the process, they just write it off and keep right on going.

Very scientific.

So, how far are we away from the parasitic aliens like the creatures from “The Thing” or the “Alien” series of movies?

anooxygen 5

anooxygen 6

We may still be pretty far away, but we definitely are closer!

 

I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Harvard professor insists that the space object named “Oumuamua,” which is zipping through our solar system as we speak, could be extraterrestrial in origin!

Abraham (Avi) Loeb, a distinguished Harvard University professor, is not backing down from his claims that a piece of extraterrestrial spacecraft technology may be flying past the orbit of Jupiter at this very moment.

Avi Loeb, one of the top astronomy professors in the world, boasting of decades of Ivy League professorships and hundreds of publicized works in respected astronomy publications, is remaining defiant that the space object, dubbed as “Oumuamua,” first noticed by Hawaiian astronomers in 2017, could be from another civilization.

avi loeb and light sail

“Considering an artificial origin, one possibility is that ‘Oumuamua is a light sail, floating in interstellar space as debris from advanced technological equipment,” Loeb and his colleague Shmuel Bialy wrote in Astrophysical Journal Letters in November, according to the Washington Post.

According to Lukas Mikelionis of FoxNews.com, “Since making the shock claim last year, many scientists have criticized Loeb for offering, in their view, the most sensationalist theory of what the object is.”

‘“Oumuamua is not an alien spaceship, and the authors of the paper insult honest scientific inquiry to even suggest it,’ Ohio State University astrophysicist Paul M. Sutter wrote in a tweet.  Other scientists are more diplomatic and haven’t publicly countered Loeb’s claims, only saying that the object is likely just some sort of rock, whether it’s a piece of an asteroid or a comet.”

Mikelionis adds, “But Loeb remains stubborn on this theory, and dismisses the claims that it’s a rock, noting that it’s moving too fast for an inert rock.  He told the [Washington] Post that the object is long yet no more than one millimeter thick, and that it’s so light that sunlight is moving the object out of the solar system.”

“Many people expected once there would be this publicity, I would back down,” Loeb says. “If someone shows me evidence to the contrary, I will immediately back down.”

“It changes your perception on reality, just knowing that we’re not alone,” he continued.

“Even as his theories attracted attention around the world, despite his colleagues’ criticism, Loeb says he’s not afraid of any possible repercussions for spreading his theories and wears it as a badge of honor, showing his unorthodox approach to science.”

I have written a couple blogs already on this subject, and it does not appear to be going away…, the subject, that is, not the object!

Please go back and check out my previous blogs on this subject for some additional perspective.

So, what do you think?  Email me and let me know.

“The universe is a pretty big place.  If it’s just us…, it seems like an awful waste of space.” – Carl Sagan, from his book, and later the movie, “Contact”

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

avi loeb and oumuamua

 

 

Climate Change!  Global Warming!  It’s the end of the world as we know it…, and I feel fine.

There are a lot of misconceptions and misnomers being thrown around by “Climate Change Alarmists.”

Climate Change Alarmists are individuals who look at you as if you have three heads if you dare to question any of their Climate Change claims or appeals.

Climate Change Alarmists call people other people who don’t swallow their story hook, line and sinker, “Climate Change Deniers.”

Ok…, let’s be clear…, NOBODY believes the climate doesn’t change or isn’t changing.

Some people just believe the Earth’s climate changes naturally, and on its own, just like it is scientifically documented to have done throughout the world’s history, whether people were around or not.

“Climate Change Deniers” are also typically skeptical of policies directed at combating Climate Change because they don’t believe there is anything people can really do to effect the climate one way or the other.

My question to the Climate Change Alarmists would be, “Did you actually expect the Earth’s climate to NOT change from time to time?  Did you really expect the Earth’s climate to remain exactly the same forever?

That seems to be where these Climate Change Alarmists are coming from.

The Earth has had periods of “Global Warming,” “Global Cooling,” and even “Ice Ages” in the past when people either weren’t even around, or people did not burn fossil fuels.  How does the Climate Change community explain this?  How did the climate change back then without the help of the “evil” human polluters?

Let’s look at a recent article by Harry Pettit, of News.com, as a typical example of a Climate Change Alarmist spinning another fantasy climate change story and scenario that just doesn’t make any sense.

According to Mr. Pettit, “An Antarctic ‘time bomb’ is waiting to go off.”

He says that, “Earth’s sea levels should be nine meters higher than they are,” and that “dramatic melting in Antarctica may soon plug the gap.”

That’s over 29 feet higher for us unscientific and/or American Neanderthals.

So…, the oceans should be 29 feet higher than they are?

That’s like a three story building you know?

Really?

Do you understand how stupid that sounds?

“They say global temperatures today are the same as they were 115,000 years ago, a time when modern humans were only just beginning to leave Africa, he continues.”

Oh really?  How could that be?  What types of cars were people driving back then?  They must have had a lot of factories pumping out plenty of emissions in old Sub-Saharan Africa, huh?

Again, do you understand how stupid that sounds?

“Research shows during this time period, ‘scorching’ ocean temperatures caused a catastrophic global ice melt.  As a result, sea levels were six to nine meters higher than they are today.  But if modern ocean temperatures are the same as they were during that period, it means our planet is missing a devastating sea rise.”

I feel like I’m dumber for just having read that.  Please take a moment to reread the previous paragraph in order to properly appreciate all of the contradictions and false assumptions made here.

And again, do you understand how stupid that sounds?

“If oceans were to rise by just 1.8 meters (about 6 feet), large swathes of coastal cities would find themselves underwater, turning streets into canals and completely submerging some buildings,” and that, “There’s no way to get tens of meters of sea level rise without getting tens of meters of sea level rise from Antarctica,” said Dr. Rob DeConto, an Antarctic expert at the University of Massachusetts in the U.S.

“In the next century, ice loss would get even worse,” he added.

Even if you throw all common sense out the window and take all of these doomsday predictions at face value, do these people really think that having America return to the Middle Ages would make any difference?

If we all stopped driving cars, stopped transporting things with trucks, stopped flying in commercial jets and stopped using fossil fuels for electric power tomorrow, would that avert all of this supposed ice melting?

If you really think so, I’ve got this bridge I’m looking to sell…, cheap.

“The Sun” newspaper, in the United Kingdom, actually has a “sea level doomsday simulator” on its website if you’d like to know whether your home would be wiped out by rising oceans!

Well isn’t that special.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

ice-caps melting

So, what the heck is this “Green New Deal” anyway?

Well, first of all it’s NOT a law.  It’s more like a “game plan” or a “road map” to follow.

It’s a liberal/socialist/environmentalist manifesto in the same vein as the Communist Manifesto.

Yes…, that’s exactly what it is.

Let me be your guide about something you will be hearing about non-stop for a long time. The “biased, liberal, fake news media” will be getting their propaganda machine cranked up into overdrive for this one.

The people that put this “Green New Deal” resolution together were either high on drugs, extremely naive, extremely confused, stupid, or some combination of all of the above, in my opinion.

So…, let’s see exactly what we have here.

This resolution validates all of its proposed actions based on the October 2018 report entitled “Special Report on Global Warming [of 1.5 degrees centigrade]” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the November 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment report.

If the report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is to be believed, humanity has just over a decade to get carbon emissions under control before catastrophic climate change impacts become unavoidable.

At the rate our government works, I guess we should all start planning our funerals, or preparing to live underground, and stockpiling food and water, because nothing is going to happen over the next ten years to fix our environment, if in fact it is broken, and if in fact it is our fault.

The United States is already the most environmentally friendly country, among major industrialized nations in the world by the way.  You sure wouldn’t know this by the way the “biased, liberal, fake news media” demonizes the USA on a daily basis.  Is China, Russia, India, Germany, The United Kingdom or Japan on board with any of this?  Because we surely cannot effect global climate change without global participation.

If the Paris Climate Agreement is any indication of the level of global participation we could expect, we’re in trouble!

In the Paris Climate Agreement, which President Trump wisely backed the U.S. out of, all of these other countries pledged their support with flowery environmental words and swore to meet the new pollution regulations AFTER the U.S. had piloted the proposed pollution levels for the first 10-20 years of the agreement!

Such determination!

Such support!

Such disingenuousness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The resolution consists of a preamble, five goals, 14 projects, and 15 requirements. The preamble establishes that there are two crises, a climate crisis and an economic crisis of wage stagnation and growing inequality.

The goals are: achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, creating jobs, providing for a just transition, and securing clean air and water.

The projects are things like: decarbonizing electricity, transportation, and industry, restoring ecosystems, and upgrading buildings and electricity grids.

Our liberal/socialist/environmentalist friends have managed to incorporate virtually all aspects of our society, economy, employment, racial issues, gender issues and government into their “end all, be all” “primary directive.”

The document itself is not even 14 pages long, so please, read it for yourself if you get the chance.

In the meantime, let’s take a look at some excerpts taken directly from the resolution:

“Whereas climate change, pollution, and environmental destruction have exacerbated systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and economic injustices (referred to in this preamble as “systemic injustices”) by disproportionately affecting indigenous communities, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth (referred to in this preamble as ‘‘frontline and vulnerable communities’’); Whereas, climate change constitutes a direct threat to the national security of the United States…”

Say what?

Are you starting to get the point?

This new Raw Deal…, I mean Green Deal, is your typical “bleeding heart” bunch of politically correct mumbo jumbo.

Here are some of the more detailed goals taken directly from the resolution:

“Upgrade all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification.”

Well gee…, that doesn’t sound expensive at all.

“Spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible, including by expanding renewable energy manufacturing and investing in existing manufacturing and industry.”

What exactly is meant by “spurring?”  I’m guessing it means spending more money.

“Working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible…”

“Working collaboratively” mean dictating unmanageable pollution standards.

“Overhauling transportation systems in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible, including through investment in zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing; clean, affordable, and accessible public transportation; and high-speed rail.”

“Overhauling transportation systems” sounds like a lot of money…, again.

“A Green New Deal must be developed through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses…”

This last part is just a bunch concepts that sound good, but will never actually happen.  Just like with The Affordable Care Act legislation, there will be nothing inclusive or transparent about it.

“To achieve the Green New Deal goals and mobilization, a Green New Deal will require the following goals and projects:”

“Providing and leveraging, in a way that ensures that the public receives appropriate ownership stakes and returns on investment, adequate capital (including through community grants, public banks, and other public financing), technical expertise, supporting policies, and other forms of assistance to communities, organizations, Federal, State, and local government agencies, and businesses working on the Green New Deal mobilization.”

“Making public investments in the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies and industries; directing investments to spur economic development, deepen and diversify industry in local and regional economies, and build wealth and community ownership, while prioritizing high-quality job creation and economic, social, and environmental benefits in frontline and vulnerable communities that may otherwise struggle with the transition away from greenhouse gas intensive industries.”

Mo’ money, mo’ money, mo’ money!!!

“Ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers to plan, implement, and administer the Green New Deal mobilization at the local level; ensuring that the Green New Deal mobilization creates high-quality union jobs that pay prevailing wages, hires local workers, offers training and advancement opportunities, and guarantees wage and benefit parity for workers affected by the transition.”

“Ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers” means only selected “enlightened” liberal individuals and groups will dictate to all of the rest of us “knuckle-draggers” what to think.

“Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.”

In the government world “Guaranteeing” something means there will be no budgetary concerns.

“Strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment; strengthening and enforcing labor, workplace health and safety, antidiscrimination, and wage and hour standards across all employers, industries, and sectors.”

“Enacting and enforcing trade rules, procurement standards, and border adjustments with strong labor and environmental protections, to stop the transfer of jobs and pollution overseas; and to grow domestic manufacturing in the United States.”

Hasn’t President Trump already pretty much taken care of this one?

“Ensuring that public lands, waters, and oceans are protected and that eminent domain is not abused.”

This means eminent domain will be abused.

“Obtaining the free, prior, and informed consent of indigenous people for all decisions that affect indigenous people and their traditional territories, honoring all treaties and agreements with indigenous people, and protecting and enforcing the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous people.”

Here’s your “bone” Native-Americans!

“Ensuring a commercial environment where every businessperson is free from unfair competition and domination by domestic or international monopolies; and providing all people of the United States with: high-quality health care; affordable, safe, and adequate housing; economic security; and access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature.”

This last section, and the last section of the resolution, is kind of a catch-all.

According to David Roberts for Vox.com, “The question of how to pay for the many public investments called for in the GND [Green New Deal] is still a bit of a political minefield. There are centrist Democrats who still believe in the old PAYGO rules, keeping a “balanced budget” within a 10-year window. There are Democrats who think deficit fears have been exaggerated and there’s nothing wrong with running a deficit to drive an economic transition. And there are Democrats who have gone full Modern Monetary Theory, which is way too complicated to explain here but amounts to the notion that, short of inflation, the level of the deficit is effectively irrelevant, as long as we’re getting the economy we want.  That discussion is just getting underway, and the better part of valor is to do what the GND resolution does: say nothing about it. Leave it for later.”

Just in case you’re keeping score at home, the Green New Deal includes a “federal job guarantee,” the right to unionize, liberal trade and monopoly policies, and universal housing and health care.

In other words, “Hello Socialism…, here we come!”

Some of this stuff is even too far left for Nancy Pelosi!  She is actually coming under some attack for even having the slightest bit of skepticism about some of the goals in the Green New Deal!

Remember the name Rhiana Gunn-Wright.  She has apparently been tabbed to be the architect of any official policy platforms developed from the Green New Deal resolution.

“Obviously, figuring out how to fundamentally transform the world’s largest economy is a lot for one person to take on. When Gunn-Wright was asked if she knows what she’s gotten into, she laughs. “It’s really exciting!”

Do you mind if I ask if this person has ever really done anything regarding any of this stuff, or is she just working from a theoretical stand point?  Has she ever had a non-political job?  Does she really know anything about economics?

“If you have more money or access to power, you can either opt out or pay to make it simpler,” she says. “The people who will have to go through all the mess are generally poorer people, with the least access to power.”

So it’ll be just like usual…, with the rich liberal entertainers, athletes, businessmen and politicians being exempt or being able to “buy” their way out of the policies the rest of us are forced to deal with.  Again…, “do as I say not as I do.”

David Roberts for Vox.com Thinks, “Gunn-Wright’s command of the issues, coupled with her unapologetic belief in the public sector to “shape markets and direct innovation,” coupled with her evident concern for the low-income and working classes, make me excited to see what New Consensus produces.”

So…, apparently Mr. Roberts is just as clueless as the authors of the resolution, Ms. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ms. Gunn-Wright and all of their partners in crime.

Ocasio-Cortez calls for 100 percent renewable electricity within 10 years, but very few policy experts believe that is possible.

By their own admission, the top three challenges facing the GND are paying for it, convincing the public, and winning over Democrats.

Roberts adds, “In the real world, if the GND looks like it has any chance of becoming a reality, it will face a giant right-wing smear campaign, coordinated across conservative media, think tanks, and politicians, funded by effectively unlimited fossil fuel wealth. The right will rush to define the GND as a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like illegal immigrants.”

That’s because, Mr. Roberts, the Green New Deal IS “a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like illegal immigrants.”

Trumpeting the truth about this foolishness is not a “right-wing smear campaign,” it’s just a matter of combating the propaganda of the “biased, liberal, fake news media” and the rest of “the swamp.”

Well, there you have it.  I hope this helped.

Like I said…, we’re not going to stop hearing about the Green New Deal anytime soon.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

ocasio-cortez inventions

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑