The Constitution; a most fascinating document. Is it still relevant?

Maybe not, but who am I to judge. I am not a natural born citizen, not even a native born citizen or a native citizen, just a naturalized citizen.

When me and my wife immigrated to America many years ago as resident Aliens from day one, we were told we could do everything as Americans except vote, get called to Jury duty, and we and our future children could never be elected president of our new country, being not naturally born citizens. This was well understood at that time.

I still remember my arrival at Kennedy Airport. The lines were long, but were progressing fast. When it was my turn the inspector looked at my passport and sighed, Immigrant. Then he asked for my complete papers. I had the roll with me, as instructed, and he opened it all and read the documents, including the results of my Wasserman test, all vaccinations and medical history. Then he took out my chest rays and held them up to the light. It seemed like he took a long time looking, the line after me grew longer and longer. He scribbled down something, and then turned to me, smiled broadly and said “Welcome to the United States.”
My naturalization service was held in Valley Forge, and we were 140 people from more than 75 countries, one or two from each country. The only exception was 4 adopted Chinese girls, given up for adoption so their parents could apply for permission to get another child and not be subject to forced abortion (it was not a requirement, it was only necessary if you wanted to keep your Chinese government job). It was quite stirring: A Canadian teacher, selected among the inductees spoke well about the freedom and liberty enjoyed by all U.S. Citizens. Ah well, those were the days.
It was with great interest that I watched President Obama’s inauguration in 2009. It was quite stirring to watch the sea of people wishing him well.
When it came to the swearing in ceremony Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts managed to reverse the order of a few words in the oath. The oath was taken on a Bible, once used by Abraham Lincoln, who, even though Lincoln was a Republican and Obama is a Democrat, Obama, as had Lincoln risen to great prominence from humble beginnings in Illinois. There was great symbolism there.
The fact that the word order of the oath had been reversed bothered some, so the next day the oath was repeated in the oval office, this time without a Bible.
The election had been unusual in many ways. One of them was that there was a question of John McCain’s eligibility to be president. He was born at Coco Solo Naval Air Station in the Panama Canal Zone, Panama, to naval officer John S. McCain, Jr. (1911–1981) and Roberta (Wright) McCain (1912 – 2020). At that time, the Panama Canal was under U.S. control. However, the small hospital where he was born was located in the civilian part of the Canal Zone, not under US control until 1941. John McCain is therefore not a native born citizen but a native Citizen.
Is he a natural born Citizen? This question was important enough for Congress to take up and decide before the election. Being born outside of U.S. this would automatically eliminate him from natural born status. But there is an out. Every child born on U.S. soil is a native born citizen with the exception of children born to parents in diplomatic service. They retain the citizenship of their parents. Since John McCain Jr. was under the command of the Commander in Chief (FDR) he therefore qualified as diplomatic emissary, and though his wife gave birth outside US soil, the exception did apply. Being legally married is important, because
“they twain shall be one flesh?
Matt 19: 4-6 (KJV) And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female. And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

This is important because this is how marriage is legally defined. There is no better to illustrate the importance of this legal definition than in the case of Terri Schiavo. Her husband was the executor of her life, never mind that he for many years had lived with another woman and fathered two children with her. The legal document of marriage defined them as one flesh, and therefore the will of her father and siblings was of no legal consequence. It is ironic, that in this case the pro-life movement took the more liberal view of marriage that prolonged, unrepented and unreconciled adultery is a disqualifier, and the reproductive rights side held fast to the definition of marriage being one flesh so they must be treated as one unit.
After reading up on the amendments to the constitution and finding that the 27th amendment took 202 years to ratify, the next area of constitutional interest was the election of 2000. Gore won the national popular vote, and it came down to Florida, where there seemed to be a tie. The State Government, being Republican tried to certify Bush as the winner, and Gore sued, After the Florida Supreme Court, having Democrat majority had overturned the lower courts decisions which had been in favor of Bush, the U S Supreme court stepped in and declared Bush the winner by a 5 to 4 vote. The interesting point in this case is that Bush argued that Federal law took precedent, since the election is national, while Gore argued States’ rights. After all, we have the electoral system and that favors States’ rights. When it comes to matters of the Constitution it is not always the way you think it should be at first glance. Gore has come a long way from States’ Rights to Global Governance, but that is another story.
The US Senate decided in 2008 in their unanimous resolution proclaiming John McCain a “natural born citizen” of the Unites States of America, based upon the well-known fact that BOTH of his parents were indeed legal citizens of the United States at the time of John’s birth. In other words, by “divine power” and the “laws of growth,” “produced by nature” of the fact that his parents were US citizens, so was John McCain, by birth right via natural ancestry.
This ruling is remarkable, since this would automatically disqualify Obama, since his father was a British subject, Bobby_Jindal, Marco Rubio and maybe even Rick Santorum since their parents were not citizens but here as legal immigrants or on student visas visa at the time of their birth.
There was a noticeable lack of interest by the Senate to do for Obama what they had done for McCain. Yet one could argue that the Obama story is even more intriguing than McCain’s.
Let us see what we know about Obama.
The Obama team has released a Certification of birth registration on the web, not in hard copy form, that states the date of birth, the names of the parents, the address of permanent residence and the state of Hawaii.
Originally the birth hospital was Queen’s Hospital in Honolulu, but that got changed to Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children. They have yet to officially confirm that Obama was born there. So we have four possibilities for his birthplace
1. Queen’s Hospital, Honolulu, HI. Not Confirmed.
2. Kapiolani Medical Center, Honolulu, HI. Not Confirmed
3. Born in Hawaii, but not in a hospital.
4. Born elsewhere, but registered in Hawaii by his grandmother by virtue of his mother being a US citizen.
The long form Birth Certificate would clear up which of the four alternatives it is. It is a simple procedure to obtain a copy of the Long form Birth Certificate, but the Obama team has hitherto spent upwards of two millions prevent its release.

Then out of the blue, after Donald Trump started hounding him about the real birth certificate they produced a layered image with composites from at least three separate documents overlaid with a separate State Seal image and signature (The signature has a happy face in it just to vex you). This document would not have standing in any court since is an obvious generated document from multiple sources.
There is one more thing. We do not know if Obama’s parents were ever legally married. No marriage certificate has been produced. So we do not know if Obama’s father has legal standing. If he had, Obama would be disqualified on the ground that Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of his birth. Kenya was in the process of becoming a part of the Commonwealth rather than a Colony, so his status is unclear. In any way he was not a US Citizen, and Obama would not qualify as a Natural Born Citizen no matter where he was born. If they were never legally married it makes it easier; all we have to prove is that he was born in Hawaii. There is just one thing. Obama’s mother was not of age to claim him alone as a US Citizen at that time, so we still do not know how it would have turned out if Congress had acted to certify Obama eligible for the presidency.
All of this is moot however. No real journalist showed any interest in the case. There were WND, CNN’s Lou Dobbs and an occasional Fox news reporter that mentioned the case, but they are not “real news organizations” (Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod 10/17/2009).
Then a retired entrepreneur from Canada, J.B. Williams discovered something remarkable: Obama was never certified eligible to be president! He published this in
Canada Free Press.
At the Democratic National Convention Obama was elected their presidential candidate and a letter was sent to all 50 states and the District of Columbia stating that it was so. The letters were signed by Nancy Pelosi and the DNC Secretary, properly notarized, 51 originals in all. They were of two kinds. One went to the State of Hawaii and it contained the language:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democratic Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.”
The other 50 originals contained the wording:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democratic Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively:
Did you catch the typo, the same typo on all 51 originals?
So for the 49 States and the District of Columbia the certification step was never made.
The Electoral College duties are: First to certify themselves eligible to cast the ballots for their candidate, then to certify the candidates eligible to serve. After these two steps it is time to vote for President, mostly by winner takes all for their State, except Nebraska and Maine, where the vote is by congressional district and the two senatorial votes by State.
The certification step was never made, not at the Convention and not by the Electoral College.
So they made the effort to make sure the oath was perfect by repeating the taking of it so every letter of the Constitution could be fulfilled, but the certification step that would have made the oath binding in the first place was never made.
The conclusion: We have a president elect that has never taken a valid oath, because he was never certified eligible to take the oath.
Why are so few people interested in this? Is it because the constitution is no longer relevant?
Or is it because it is becoming a moot point anyway after the President signed the Copenhagen treaty in December 2009, and after the Senate ratifies it the Constitution will be no more?
And why was this missing certification step discovered by a Canadian (J.B. Williams), and the warning that ratifying the Copenhagen Treaty would sign away our sovereignty and Constitution to an unelected international body was discovered by a British subject, Lord Monckton ?
Is the press so in love with internationalism that it is forbidden to search into these matters? If so, this explains the treatment of Sarah Palin. She is a dangerous woman to internationalists, because she really loves the USA, its Constitution and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This woman had to be stopped using all means of smear known to man. It all stars to make sense.

Fast forward to the 2020 election and another vice presidential candidate. Kamala Harris was born in the U.S, thus being a native born citizen, but none of her parents were citizens at the time of her birth. They were both students at the time, and probably had F-1 or H-1b visas, or possibly green cards, but in any case they were not citizens at the time of her birth. When I immigrated to the U.s I was told that my future children could not be president. At that time this was simple truth, nobody questioned it.

On this September 11, let us remember the cross at Calvary, the cross ar Ground Zero, and the cross standing in Notre Dame cathedral. Two Limericks

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1)

The original location where the iron cross was found.

For Muslims, atheists and humanists the cross is an offense since it is to them the stench of death. But to us who believe it is the symbol of redemption and new and eternal life in Christ. If they were not pricked in their hearts when they see the cross they would not be offended.

He died  on the cross at Ground Zero.

We have only one risen hero.

But the fools reject grace,

stay condemned, cannot face

The truth in The Cross at Ground Zero.

 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (St. John 3:16-17)

An intermediate location for the cross

The final place for the Iron cross near the 9/11 museum.

These were the final words of Governor Sarah Palin after a successful week anchoring “On Point” with the One America News.

Governor Palin is a true servant. Her parents, Chuck and Sally Heath, worked at the Fresh Kills landfill in Staten Island, New York in January and February 2002 as part of a federal Department of Agriculture program.

In a telephone interview, Mr. Heath said he and his wife had worked to keep sea gulls and rats from scavenging the human remains in the debris. Mr. Heath, then 70, a retired science teacher, and Mrs. Heath, then 68, a retired secretary, had worked for the Agriculture Department for 15 years. They travel around the world dealing with “nuisance” animals like rats and bears.

“A lot of people just didn’t like the job, it was kind of a morbid thing,” he said of the work at the landfill. “But I thought it was part of history.”

This is the attitude of a servant.

On April 16 2019 at the church of Notre Dame in Paris there was a fire. Much was lost.

“Art and architecture have a unique ability to help us connect across our differences and bring people together in important ways,” posted U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar. “Thinking of the people of Paris and praying for every first responder trying to save this wonder.”

No, Ms Omar, it is much more than that, rather

What nearly destroyed Notre Dame;

historical artworks for some.

Not the fall of the steeple,

God’s church is the people

the Cross stands for all who will come.

Yes, the fire was spectacular.

Yes, the cross still stands as it did when, as U.S. Rep Ilhan Omar so famously quoted “Somebody did something at 9/11”

“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 53:1)

Climate Catastrophe? No, but an environmental challenge. A Limerick.

Is climate change all in the cloud?

Acknowledge it is not allowed.

Settled science, they say.

Buckle up and portray

disaster! Close rank, join the crowd.

I believe in climate change. It is obvious by observing how the climate has changed over the years. Here is a chart of global temperature and CO2 for the last 600 million years.

The chart is smoothed over millions of years, but it shows that the global average tempera ture stabilizes at 22C regardless of CO2 levels, and there is precious little correlation between temperature and CO2 level. Taking a look at the last 450,000 years it shows an interesting pattern:

It shows that more than 90 percent of the time the earth has been colder than today, most of that time in a series of ice ages, interrupted with inter-glacial periods of between 5,000 and 20,000 years.  This inter-glacial period is of interest, since it points to our future – another ice age, the question is: When it will start? According to the Milanković cycles we are still in the moderate temperatures sweetspot, and it will last for another few thousand years, but the trend is down, tne next ice age is inevitable. In fact, except for the little ice age and the time between the Roman warm period and the medieval warm period,  the global temperatures have been higher than now for the last ten thousand years. This shows the temperature from the Greenland ice cores for the last 10000 years:


All of these changes in climate occurred with a relative constant CO2 level of about 260 ppm!

This time is different; CO2 levels are now over 400 ppm, rising about 2 ppm per year with no end in sight. The question is: Is this increase good or bad? If it is bad, how bad is it going to be?

To answer this question the world spends over 400 billion dollars a year in climate research and are starting to spend much more in climate remediation. Over 30 nations are making climate models trying to predict future temperature trends. Of the models so far all but one fail miserably when compared to what actually is happening. The sole exception is the Russian model which tries to fit their  model to past temperature records rather than postulate that response from CO2 and water vapor are always additive.

There is a better, far simpler way to predict future temperature trends. The reason CO2 and water vapor are not always additive is because water vapor is a condensing gas, sometimes forming clouds, which drastically alter the temperature of the surface. Clouds forming at day reflects a large portion of the sunlight back into space, clouds at night keep the heat in.

Willis Eschenbach has made en excellent analysis of 19 years of data from CERES (Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System from NASA). He compensates for the effect of Advection (horizontal heat transfer of energy from one place on earth to another.) The results are startling:

The 3.7 W/m2 is the expected increase of heat retention for a doubling of CO2 as per IPCC  (the U.N  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). A similar result is obtained if one is to include data from HadCRUT (Temperature data from the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office)

This agrees very well with my own, much coarser examination of data, but should include that the expected temperature increase observed for a doubling of CO2 is by no means evenly distributed. In addition, if temperature rises 0,39C there will be  about 2.6 % more water vapor in the air which would rise temperature another 0.35 C. This too is not evenly distributed. Here are the expected result:

In the tropical doldrums there will be no change at all, the water vapor is all dominant and thunderstorms keep the average temperature constant.

In the 10-40 latitude there will be an increase, but increased clouds will moderate the increase except in the most arid deserts that will experience around a 0.9 C increase.

The temperate regions will experience about a 0.4 C increase in the wet areas, and about a 0.6 C in the arid parts.

Most of the increase will be experienced around the poles, with minimum temperatures rising five to ten degrees, but maximum temperatures staying about the same. We are seeing this increase in the Arctic, and the rise is nearly all due to rising winter minimum temperatures.

Source: Danish Meteorology Institute

Why is that? With on the average 2.6 % increase in water vapor there will be an increase in the rainfall,  about 2.6% on average, but since there is no change in the tropics it will be concentrated at the higher latitudes, especially around the poles where it will manifest itself as more snow, and that is the main reason for the increased minimum temperatures. Notice there has been no increase in summer temperatures!

So, how bad is it going to get if nothing is done to stop the increase in CO2?

The temperature difference between poles and equator will be less, which means:

Fewer and less severe hurricanes, less severe tornadoes, less severe winter storms, less droughts.

But there will be about 2% more average cloud cover, more rain and more flooding.

So, with an 0.4C average temperature we will not even be back to the medieval warm period, much less the Roman warm period, not to speak of the Minoan warm period.

The sinking eastern seaboard is a problem that has very little to do with ocean rising, and all to do with tectonic plates movements, which we will have to accept.

Will anything else good come out of this climate change?

Yes, indeed. With a doubling of CO2 there will be a corresponding response from plant life increasing biological productivity 30 to 60%. It is not linear, and above 800 ppm it tapers of for most plant species. But we will be able to feed at least another 3 billion people and keep them from hunger, but also much cattle and wild animals, (yes that includes flies and gnats, but I digress)

This picture gives us hope for the future. Notice the most significant increase was in Sub-Saharan Africa, western United States, western Australia and western India. These are the areas that need more rain the most!

If increasing CO2 concentration is not the problem, then what is? Let us take a look at the sources  from which U.S. generates electrical energy.

Image result for us electricity generation by source

We live in challenging times indeed, with enormous environmental challenges. It takes a lot of energy to clean up the mess we have generated over the ages. It would be a shame to use up our remaining coal, oil and gas to produce the electricity needed to clean up. Oil coal and gas will eventually be depleted and we need to save some for our great grandchildren so they can enjoy flying like we have become accustomed to. Like the famous conservationist Sarah Palin once said: “for when it’s gone, it’s gone.

Solar generation is about 4 times more expensive (without subsidies) to produce energy than coal and gas, but has important niche applications, such as on roofs for backup in case of short grid failures and for peak power assist. The Amish people have given many practical applications on how to live off the grid.

Wind power is cheaper when the wind blows, but the full generation capacity has to be there even when the wind doesn’t blow, so the only gain from wind power is to lessen the mining or extraction of carbon. In addition, wind power kills birds, the free yearly quota of allowable Bald Eagle kills was upped from 1200 to 4200 during the Obama administration. Golden Eagles and a few other rare birds have a quarter of a million dollar fine associated with their kills. If wind power is increased without finding a solution to the bird kills, whole species may become extinct.

Hydroelectric power is for all practical purpose maxed out, except one large untapped resource; the Kongo river in Africa. Some hydro electrical project do more harm than good, such as the Aswan Dam in Egypt, and some are waiting for the next big earthquake, such as the Three Gorges Dam in China.

Geothermal power is good but difficult and risky to utilize in geologically unstable areas.

Biomass should never be burned for electricity production but be used for soil regeneration to combat erosion. Only polluted biomass such as medical waste and plastics should be incinerated at high temperature, complete with scrubbers to eliminate poisonous gases.

All necessary cleanup and recycling consume a lot of energy, and it has to be generated somehow. We would like save some Coal, Natural Gas and Petroleum for our great grandchildren. This leaves us only

Nuclear power.  After a nearly thirty year hiatus in building new nuclear power plants they are slowly being built again. The permit process is fraught with citizen opposition (NIMBY), very strict bureaucratic delay, first by the Three Mile Island incident, then by the Chernobyl disaster/unintended sabotage, and finally by the Fukushima catastrophe. In addition conventional nuclear power produces large amounts of transuranium waste products that has to be stored for a million years. The Obama administration ended reprocessing of spent fuel rods, so not only must the transuranium products be stored, but also some unused U235. This makes conventional nuclear power using enriched Uranium too expensive to compete against coal or natural gas. But there are powerful commercial interests to keep it this way. After the Westinghouse bankruptcy GE has a virtual monopoly on nuclear power. They are in no hurry to make any changes.

There is a better way: Thorium Nuclear power. The advantages are:

1. A million years supply at today’s consumption levels.

2. Thorium already mined, ready to be extracted.

3. One ten-thousandth of the TRansUranium waste compared to a U-235 based fast breeder reactor.

4. Thorium based nuclear power produces Pu-238, needed for space exploration.

5. Radioactive waste from an LFTR decays down to background radiation in 300 years compared to a million years for U-235 based reactors.

6. Thorium based nuclear power is not suited for making nuclear bombs.

7. Produces isotopes that helps cure certain cancers.

8. Molten Salt Thorium Reactors are earthquake safe.

9. Molten Salt Thorium Reactors cannot have a meltdown, the fuel ia already molten.

10. Molten Salt Nuclear Reactors have a very high negative temperature coefficient leading to a safe and stable control.

11. Atmospheric pressure operating conditions, no risk for explosions.

12. Virtually no spent fuel problem, very little on site storage or transport.

13. Thorium Nuclear Power generators  scale  beautifully from small portable generators to full size power plants.

14. No need for evacuation zones, can be placed near urban areas.

15. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors will work both as Base Load and Load Following power plants.

16. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors will lessen the need for an expanded national grid.

17. Russia has an active Thorium program.

18. China is having a massive Thorium program.

19. India is having an ambitious Thorium program.

20. United States used to be the leader in Thorium usage. What happened?

21. With a Molten Salt Reactor, accidents like the Three Mile Island disaster will not happen.

22. With a Molten Salt Reactor, disasters like Chernobyl are impossible.

23. With Molten Salt Reactors, a catastrophe like Fukushima cannot happen.

24. Produces electrical energy at about 4 cents per KWh.

25. Can deplete some of the existing radioactive waste and nuclear weapons stockpiles.

There is no time to waste. This is my suggestion list:

1. Immediately take Thorium off the list of “source materials”. While Thorium is radioactive slightly above background radiation no amount of Thorium can make it go critical, and it cannot be source material for making bombs.

2. Make separate regulations for Thorium based Nuclear plants apart from Uranium plants. One thing that goes away is the need for evacuation zones due to the inherent safety of Thorium Nuclear plants.

3. Declare Thorium Nuclear Power to be the preferred replacement for Coal or Gas powered electric plants.

4. Streamline the permit process, like Uranium powered plants enjoyed when there was a desire to build Nuclear Bombs.

5. Increase research and development into Liquid Fluoride Thorium reactors to speed up their development.

6. Develop hybrid Tokamak powered Thorium reactors like the one Russia is developing to burn off transuraniun  nuclear waste products.

With all this done, I envision coal, gas and biofuel Power stations to be eliminated within ten years, and transuranium waste products to be eliminated within twenty years.

When Coal, gas and biofuel are eliminated as source for Electric Power, then it is time to switch most of the transportation to electric cars and trucks, but not before.

in another twenty years, maybe, just maybe it is time for Fusion Power to take over.

Let us get going!


Climate catastrophe? What is the truth? Do the presidential candidates even care about the truth? A Limerick.

The Epoch called Anthropocene:

Man’s fire appeared on the scene.

CO2, it is good

makes it green, grows more food.

To call it THE threat, that’s obscene.

We live in a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene, where Earth faces the immediate danger of a climate catastrophe. So say most of the Democratic party presidential candidates.  Science Advances wrote in 09 Nov. 2016: Nonlinear climate sensitivity and its implications for future greenhouse warming.  The paper claims that as temperature increases due to increased CO2 levels the climate sensitivity also increases leading to global heating runaway. To prove the point it provides the following graph:

globaltemperatureIt was timed for the day after the U.S. election to highlight the necessity of complete adherence to the Paris accord. This accord was one of  the accomplishments of the Obama administration, as former President Barack Obama said April 22, 2016: “Today is Earth Day — the last one I’ll celebrate as President. Looking back over the past seven years, I’m hopeful that the work we’ve done will allow my daughters and all of our children to inherit a cleaner, healthier, and safer planet. But I know there is still work to do.

Can this really be true that implementing the Paris agreement is our only chance to avert this disaster?

Oh yes I remember it well,  the first Earth Day, April 22, 1970, the 100th anniversary of Lenin’s birth. It was in Philadelphia, and Ira Einhorn,Earthday1070IraEinhorn later known as the Unicorn killer was master of ceremonies. At that time the great fear was that we are heading for another ice age because of all the acid rain the coal burning electricity plants spewed out, and having just visited Pittsburgh, I totally agreed and was ready to jump in and help. The acid rain was  killing the trouts in the Northern, acidic lakes, and pollution was seen everywhere. Being from Sweden and having just 6a00d83451580669e2019b01ece999970bimmigrated I was appalled at the lack of concern for the environment, and the imminent threat of the coming ice age. Even Time Magazine jumped into the fray and wrote about the rapid increase of the Arctic Ice cover and other signs of the onset of a new Ice age. Average temperatures was to be maybe up to seven degrees colder by the year 2000, so prepare!

Having been raised in Sweden, born in a town on the granite covered shores of lysekil-swedenSkagerrak there were signs of the last ice age everywhere. Sweden is still recovering from it and is rising out of the ocean at a rate of up to three feet per century and has been doing so since the inland ice began to melt. Of course this contributes to sea levels rising in the rest of the world.  The Ice Age left evidence of cataclysmic events as the climate switched from cold to warm. I still remember when, as a lad my father took me to a place in Western Sweden, called “Brobacka” where there are  around 40 “jättegrytor” (giant kettles),  including the biggest giant kettle in the Nordic Countries, measuring 59 feet diameter. They were formed when large rivers formed under the rapidly melting ice pack. We learned in school about ice ages, and that we are at the end of the interglacial period, and we narrowly avoided a new ice age in the 1600’s and are thankful it didn’t happen then. We also learned that during the Minoan warm period temperatures were much warmer than now, and the northernmost latitude for willows was at least 400 miles further to the north.

The normal climate for the earth is that we are in an ice age, which is a very stable period, but for  some reason an imbalance occurs and the climate switches abruptly to an interglacial period. After a few thousand years we go back into an ice age and stay there for around 100000 years and the cycle repeats. The question is, what mechanism is ruling ice ages and interglacial periods?

antarctic_icecoreTDoes CO2 concentration drive climate change? From the chart above it seems so. Properly plotted there seems to be a near perfect alignment.  But to find what is cause and effect we need to expand the time scale as is seen in the figure below:

end-of-ice-age-edWe can see from these charts that CO2 concentrations and temperature follow each other closely, but, and this is important:  Air Temperature rises first, then comes the increase in CO2 and finally the rise in ocean temperature. As ice melts and the ocean temperature increases it releases CO2, and this leads to a further temperature rise.  But at some time the temperature stops rising, while CO2 levels still rise.  Since about 10000 years ago the temperature has been slowly decreasing and so has the CO2 levels. The Coral reefs make carbonates, the bogs make cellulose, the oceans revert to cooling and start to absorb CO2 again.

Give thanks for “the pause” and clouds. A Limerick.

What is the reason for the cooling? Could it be volcanic eruptions?

Maybe, but volcanic eruptions are temporary and does not cool the climate for more than a few years. Meanwhile, enjoy the vegetation during this interglacial warm period.leaf-areaIt is true that CO2 is a greenhouse gas,  second only to water vapor in importance.It is responsible for about 9 degree Celsius rise in global temperature, and if CO2 increases, so does its greenhouse effect. The increased temperature leads to more water vapor in the air, and water vapor is the strongest greenhouse gas, so there is a risk of reaching a “tipping point” when we could experience a thermal runaway of the planet. All of this is true, so U.N. and many governments around the world have sponsored studies to model  climate change, over a hundred models have been constructed, they all come up with rather gloomy forecasts. The research is so intense that over 3 billion dollars of government monies are spent yearly on climate change research.

All models show a similar pattern, a fairly steep and more or less linear rise in temperature as CO2 increases. There is only one major thing wrong with them. They do not agree with what is happening to the global temperature. We have now had 224 months (Sep 2015) without any global warming. Since then there has been a rather strong el nino, much like the one in 1998 and global temperatures have been at new record temperatures after adjustment of old temperatures.

Back to a climate models chart

CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1What is wrong with the models? They all assume a passive earth, where there is no negative feedback to the changing environment. It turns out, the earth has a “governor”, and it can be expressed in one word, albedo, which means “whiteness” or how much of the incoming sunlight that gets reflected back into space. The major albedo changes of the earth are the appearance of clouds. How did the models do on clouds?

CloudmodelsNone of the models agree with reality when it comes to clouds. It also matters what type of clouds there are, and when they occur. Night clouds keep the warm in and increases the greenhouse effect. Daytime clouds reflects the incoming sunlight and the result is a net cooing effect.

Other albedo changers are the amount of ice around the poles, but even land use changes, such as forests cut down and replaced by agriculture and urbanization.

When there is snow or ice on the ground, more sunlight gets reflected and it gets colder still. Urban heat islands are warmer than the surroundings, airports are warmer than its surroundings. Interestingly, that is where we are placing our new weather stations. (This is great for pilots that have to evaluate take-off and landing conditions, but is less than ideal for climate research. But then again, climate research has moved from the realm of physical science to political science, where different rules do apply.)

The most important albedo changers of the earth are clouds. Without them no land based life would be possible since clouds serve both as rain makers and temperature stabilizers. If there were no clouds the equilibrium temperature at the equator would be around 140 degrees F.

Over the oceans, in the so called “doldrums” where there are no trade winds, the mornings start with a warm-up, and when the conditions are right a shower or thunderstorm occurs. The ambient temperature is usually between 84 and 88 degrees when this happens. As CO2 concentrations increase thunderstorms occur a few minutes earlier and last a little bit longer, but they are no more severe and as a result the average temperature stays the same.

See the following chart. It is divided into five regions, Arctic, North temperate, tropical, South temperate and Antarctic.uah-lower-troposphere-temperatureThe next region is the North temperate. This includes the desert areas. In desert areas of the world this temperature regulator doesn’t work well, so deserts will receive the full force of temperature increase which is 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit per doubling of CO2 levels.

In the temperate region the temperature increase will be somewhere in between. Dry days will be warmer, cloudy and rainy days will have the same temperature as before, since the cloud regulator starts to function.

The Arctic and Antarctic regions are a special case. None of the models have done a good job at modeling the clouds at the poles, especially the South Pole. (See the cloud chart above.) The Arctic will warm up more than 2 degrees F, how much is a question. In the South average temperatures will rise from – 70 degrees F in the interior all the way to maybe – 63 degrees F, and come closer to freezing in the summer at the northern edges. There will be added snowfall that will expand the ice sheet. The Antarctic ice sheet has set new records since record keeping began, and war 2 years ago bottoming out at 30% more ice than the 30 year average. Recently even the Antarctic ice sheet been receding but are now stabilizing again.

The North Pole region is even more complicated since it is partially land, partially ocean. The oceanic ice cap has been shrinking  at a fairly constant rate the last 30 years, but since 2012 it broke the trend and grew back to break the trend line. The winter snow cap has remained at about the same level year to year with a slightly positive trend line, this year being no exception.  So, why is the snow cover growing slightly, but ice cover shrinking? The common explanation has been global warming, but the ice cover kept shrinking even as the temperature increase leveled off. There are two possible explanations: Warming oceans and changes in pollution. The North Atlantic Oscillation has been mostly positive (warmer) since 1970 and has only recently turned negative, so that is certainly part of the cause of the shrinking of the icecap, but another candidate is even more likely: Carbon Pollution. With that I do not mean CO2, but good old soot, spewing out from the smokestacks of  power plants in China. 47% of all coal burned is burned in China, often low grade lignite with no scrubbers. The air in Beijing is toxic to humans more days than not. (China turned off some of the most polluting power plants during the 2008 Summer Olympics.) Some of that soot finds its way to the arctic and settles on the ice, changing its albedo, and the sun has a chance to melt the ice more efficiently. This occurs mostly in the months of August and September when the Sun is at a low angle anyway, so the changing of the albedo has very little effect on temperature. The net result of all this is that the average temperature in the North Pole region will rise about 4 degrees Fahrenheit for a doubling of the CO2. The maximum temperatures will not rise, it is all rising minima due to sligntly increased cloud cover. This will have a very minor effect on the Greenland ice cap since they are nearly always way below freezing anyway (-28 degree C average). The largest effect will be in August and September when all new snow has melted and the soot from years past is exposed. It will also lead to an increase in the precipitation in the form of snow, so the net result is the glaciers may start growing again if the amount of soot can be reduced.

An interesting fact is that the sunlight reflection is larger over water than over ice in August and September in the Arctic, so melting the Arctic ice reduces the greenhouse effect.

The conclusion is: The temperature regulator of the earth is working quite well, and the increase in temperature at the poles is welcome as it lessens the temperature gradient between the tropics and the polar regions, which in turn reduces the severity of storms, and tornadoes, since they are mostly generated by temperature differences and the different density of warm, humid and dry, cold air.

The number of major hurricanes that makes landfall in the U.S. is on a slight decline

even after taking into account hurricanes Florence and Michael that are not included in this chart.

Tornadoes are holding stable, but major T\tornadoes are on a decline.


tornado chart

The second half of May had a large number of tornadoes, but it is still over 6 years since there was a Category 5 tornado.




















The Polar bears will do quite well, their numbers have more than doubled in the last 50 years.

Will droughts increase? The data does not indicate so:


Then there is the case about wildfires. It used to be much worse before modern forest management

What about ocean acidification? As CO2 increases, a lot of it will be absorbed in the oceans, thereby making the oceans more acid. This is true, but CO2 is a very mild acid and has a minor acidic influence. Of much more importance is acid rain. At one time in the 70’s some lakes in Norway had a Ph. of about 4.5, enough to kill most trout fishes. In Sweden it was said they fertilized their rivers and lakes four times as much as tilled soil, leading to significant acidification of both the Baltic and the North Sea. The Baltic Sea is still in danger of total oxygen depletion. By comparison to these dangers CO2 in the ocean is only a very minor disturbance. Clean the rivers and lakes first!


Oh, and one more thing. The sea level rise is a natural phenomenon of tectonic plate movements, the Atlantic Ridge the Hudson bay, Greenland and the Nordic countries are rising and the Eastern Seaboard is sinking.  These movements will continue to occur regardless of climate.

John Kerry once gave a speech said in Indonesia the other day: “The science is unequivocal, and those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand. We don’t have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society.  And in a sense, climate change can now be considered another weapon of mass destruction, perhaps the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.

The opposite is true, increased levels of CO2 is a major vehicle of wealth distribution. (Green is increased plant growth, red is decreased,  1982 – 2010)

increaseThe increase in temperature is manageable and even desirable in most regions of the world, desert areas and areas prone to flooding being the exception.

In conclusion:

CO2 is a clean gas, necessary for life, and an increase in the amount of CO2 is highly desirable.

The very minor increase in temperature (Global about 0.7F ) is on balance beneficial, since it leads to a less violent climate, with fewer storms, hurricanes and tornadoes.

The increase in CO2 makes us able to feed another 2 billion people on earth, not to mention additional wildlife.

Ocean acidification is a problem, not so much from CO2, but from sulfuric acid, nitrates and other pollutants. The major offender: China.

The increase in precipitation is beneficial, except in areas already prone to flooding. It is especially welcome in arid areas. The chart below show no increase in heavy rains as CO2 increases.


On the other hand the great conservationist SARAH PALIN once said: “We’ve got to remind Americans that the effort has got to be even greater today toward conservation because these finite resources that we’re dealing with obviously – once oil is gone it’s gone, once gas is gone, it’s gone. And I think our nation has really become kind of spoiled in that arena.”[Fox News, Hannity’s America, 10/12/08]

Coal, oil, peat, wood  and natural gas are our best raw material to sustain life as we know it, and are far to valuable to waste on electricity production, so let us switch electricity production to thorium based nuclear energy


Coal can be converted to jet fuel and gasoline, air planes have no alternative fuels.

I welcome constructive comments. Tell me where I am going wrong. I have done my very best to look at what is really happening to the earth and from there draw conclusions, rather than rely on climate models.


The cross at Notre Dame, the cross at Calvary and the cross at 9/11 ground zero. Two Limericks.

“Art and architecture have a unique ability to help us connect across our differences and bring people together in important ways,” posted U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar. “Thinking of the people of Paris and praying for every first responder trying to save this wonder.”

No, Ms Omar, it is much more than that, rather

What nearly destroyed Notre Dame;

historical artworks for some.

Not the fall of the steeple,

God’s church is the people

the Cross stands for all who will come.



Yes, the cross still stands as it did when, as U.S. Rep Ilhan Omar so famously quoted “Somebody did something at 9/11”

“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1)

For Muslims, atheists and humanists the cross is an offense since it is to them the stench of death. But to us who believe it is the symbol of redemption and new and eternal life in Christ. If they were not pricked in their hearts when they see the cross they would not be offended.

He died  on the cross at Ground Zero.

We have only one risen hero.

But the fools do “diss” grace,

stay condemned, cannot face

The truth in The Cross at Ground Zero.

 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (St. John 3:16-17)

iron crossTop: The original  location where the iron cross was found.

crossMiddle: Intermediate location for the Iron cross.

Bottom: The final place for the Iron cross near the 9/11 museum.

These were the final words of Governor Sarah Palin after a successful week anchoring “On Point” with the One America News.

Governor Palin is a true servant. Her parents, Chuck and Sally Heath, worked at the Fresh Kills landfill in Staten Island, New York in January and February 2002 as part of a federal Department of Agriculture program.

In a telephone interview, Mr. Heath said he and his wife had worked to keep sea gulls and rats from scavenging the human  remains in the debris. Mr. Heath, then 70, a retired science teacher, and Mrs. Heath, then 68, a retired secretary, had worked for the Agriculture Department for 15 years. They travel around the world dealing with “nuisance” animals like rats and bears.

“A lot of people just didn’t like the job, it was kind of a morbid thing,” he said of the work at the landfill. “But I thought it was part of history.”

This is the attitude of a servant.

At 99, after affecting millions on earth Billy Graham is finally gone home to meet his savior and also his wife.

The Rev. Billy Graham passed away this morning, the 21 of February at the age of 99. What a life this man had! And God even gave him the grace to give a “final” message on God’s grace, ending with the sinner’s prayer. I watched the moving messages, but with his passing it hit me;  In the form of a Limerick:


He spoke to the millions on earth.

How much is a life like that worth?

In God’s eyes it’s the same

As that bum that just came

to the cross. Of God’s grace there’s no dearth.

Picture above: Sarah Palin congratulates Billy graham on his 95th birthday. Franklin Graham and Todd Palin are the other two. At the 95 year celebration Sarah Palin gave the tribute:

Bear arms or bare arms, a Limerick.

A number of female House Democrats wore sleeveless clothing on Friday, tweeting in support of “Sleeveless Friday.” The action was part of the push to modernize the House dress code.

Bear arms or bare arms is at play,

a second amendment display,

so oft misunderstood,

one for choice, one for good.

The Dems keep on going astray.

A lesson from the Kurds:








The ISIS are cowards, they flee

when women as soldiers they see.

For they go right to hell

if they die, that’s the spell.

Or is it, they go covfefe?

Just keep your aim! Still the leader :

Why did Sarah Palin sue the New York Times? A Limerick.

For what Sarah Palin did sue

concerns all of us, me and you.

Defamations galore

we must fight, and abhor

to keep this our land free and true.

From NYT editorial June 14, 2017.

Not all the details are known yet about what happened in Virginia, but a sickeningly familiar pattern is emerging in the assault: The sniper, James Hodgkinson, who was killed by Capitol Police officers, was surely deranged, and his derangement had found its fuel in politics. Mr. Hodgkinson was a Bernie Sanders supporter and campaign volunteer virulently opposed to President Trump. He posted many anti-Trump messages on social media, including one in March that said “Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.

At the time the political rhetoric was indeed heated, but it was concentrated on the hatred for Sarah Palin. This is my recollection from that time:

Arizona Tragic shootings. Blame Sarah First. Proverbs 30:15-16 (King James Version) The horseleach hath two daughters, crying, Give, give. There are three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things say not, It is enough: The grave; and the barren womb; the earth that is not filled with water; and the fire that saith not, It is enough.

Hang Sarah in effigy: freedom of speech,  (1)

When Dem’s paint a bullseye, it is but to teach. (2)

The Lib’s are horseleeches,

Cry “Give” in their speeches.

When tragedy strikes – Times first Sarah besmeech. (3)

With many photos:





Russian embassy trolls, a Limerick, April 1.

A message from embassy trolls.

From Russia with love, as it rolls.

AP checked: Is it true?

April fool! We fooled you!

They fooled AP’s “fake news” controls!

The automated switchboard at the Russian embassy had yesterday this recorded message:

“You have reached the Russian Embassy. Your call is very important to us.”
“To arrange a call from a Russian diplomat to your political opponent, press 1.”
” To use the services of Russian hackers, press 2.”
” To request election interference, press 3, and wait until the next election campaign”

The Associated Press reports—because, apparently, AP felt the need to check—it was able to confirm the recording was meant as a “joke.”

Yes, AP has fact checkers. They used at least nine to fact check Sarah Palin’s book, “Going rouge”, but no one was the slightest interested in fact checking first candidate, then president Obama, his words were not to be fact checked, at least not by AP.

And they do not understand what is a joke.