November 23, 2017

Maine Moose Ticks And the Death of Man-Caused Global Warming

Climate Change, known to anyone with a brain as weather, can have effects on the growth and perpetuation of  Dermacentor albipictus – the moose tick or winter tick. Anthropogenic (man-caused) climate change does not exist and is dying in its tracks, and yet scientists and wildlife managers cling relentlessly to its shoestrings. Perhaps it’s the convenience of always having an excuse for everything that doesn’t go as planned or even for failing to do your job. Just blame it on Climate Change.

Climate Change, which one can only assume is always used in the context of Anthropogenic Climate Change, is 100% based on computer modeling. In other words it is fake. Actual temperature takings worldwide are not only flawed and basically useless information, but they aren’t living up to the hype of “we’re all going to die drown.” And so, the only recourse is to cling to computer modeling because the modeling can be manipulated to achieve the desired results, not necessarily matching reality.

To the honest person, computer modeling is a waste of time. This society is so completely addicted to technology that we fail miserably in learning how to think and observe. If the models don’t give us what we want, we will simply manipulate things until they do. How dire will things become once the entire world is dependent upon Artificial Intelligence, which is frighteningly on our doorstep?

Another example of the failures of computer modeling was reported at Powerline. The big cheeses of Al Gore’s money-making fake anthropogenic Climate Change, are trying to find ways to explain how their computer modeling has miserably failed them. Within the same report, we learn that computer modeling that was used to predict that by the year 2050 the United States would be 100% employing nothing but wind, solar and hydro power, also is failing and scientists are lining up in droves to protest the use and abuse of computer modeling in claiming the high ground on science.

But there’s money in it!

So, how will wildlife managers in Maine and elsewhere around the globe, explain their theoretic messes, once finally the fairy tale of man causing Climate Change is buried? Or will they remain the relic holdovers, forever clinging, bitterly, to their guns and Bibles hockey stick graphs while camped out at the beaches waiting for the water level to rise? (And waiting for cold winters to kill off all the ticks)

Whether it’s moose ticks, Lyme-causing ticks or Aunt Mabel’s lousy tasting homemade jelly, blaming global warming for it is representative of lousy use of a legitimate scientific method. Believing that the science of Anthropogenic Climate Change is “settled” has done the science community a grave disservice.

Once Artificial Intelligence rules the world, everything will be “settled” once and for all.

Share

Computer Modeling To Predict Crime

*Editor’s Note*Evidently man doesn’t think himself intelligent enough to realize in areas where crime is rampant, crime will persist. Instead, police departments are beginning to further fall down on the job by relying on computer modeling in hopes of stopping a crime before it happens. What possibly could go wrong?

Anyone familiar with computer modeling knows that, not only is it unreliable, but it is inaccurate and established for a free ride toward fraud and corruption, where money is the reward. Two quick examples that should be quite visible to people are, climate modeling and wildlife management modeling. If we examine the predictions created through computer modeling for climate change, most of the United States would be threatened by shoreline flooding, drought, weather disasters, etc. Nothing has happened out of the ordinary but that doesn’t stop the useless relying on computer modeling to continue cash flows. The same can be said of wildlife management modeling. Without stepping a foot in the field, so-called “wildlife biologists” readily predict doom and gloom to the many species of concern, and yet none of the predictions hold any water. Again, this doesn’t stop the fraud associated with it – of course driven by money.

We see from the article linked to below, police think computer modeling will “predict” where the next act of crime will take place. Last time I checked, the crime occurs in places where the crime has always occurred. Somethings never change. Or is the “computer modeling” the scapegoat for 1.) failure to do your job, or 2.) an excuse for racial profiling?

Whatever the reasons, the implementation of computer modeling to predict crime is, not only a waste of tax dollars but just another system to perpetuate government fraud and corruption, while at the same time labeling them “heroes.”

“Predictive policing” represents a paradigm shift that is sweeping police departments across the country. Law enforcement agencies are increasingly trying to forecast where and when crime will occur, or who might be a perpetrator or a victim, using software that relies on algorithms, the same math Amazon uses to recommend books.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Wildlife’s Modern Management: Thousands of Trail Cameras

It doesn’t get any poorer than this. Wisconsin has decided, along with NASA (?) to litter the forests and fields with 6,000 trail cameras, make the photos accessible to the WORLD for identification, so that the fish and wildlife department can better manage wildlife.

“Photos will be uploaded to a crowd-sourcing website; viewers will be asked to view them and try to identify the animals in them.”

“…should provide the best idea yet of the size of animal populations and their movements.”

“We’re hoping to provide data to solve some of these (population) controversies.”
“The pictures will be uploaded to the crowd-sourcing Zooniverse website, where people from around the world help researchers with their projects.”

“The site’s visitors can view the photos and identify what they think the animal is with the help of a detailed field guide.”

“The DNR plans to enter the data into models…”
“Wisconsin’s data won’t be perfect since people with no scientific training who may have never been to Wisconsin or the United States will be making species identification.”
This is the New Science Paradigm – changing the way we discuss wildlife management. There is basically zero science involved in any of this. What could possibly go right?
Share

Moose Are Dying – Intelligent, Responsible Journalism is Extinct

An article sent to me by a reader, epitomizes the disgusting, irresponsible, ignorant, embellishing journalism is using to further brainwash already brainwashed people, who have had independent thought bred out of them.

The headline begins the travesty by declaring that moose are “dying in droves” because of global warming. Combine this with a final hilarious statement that:

A study earlier this year predicts that up to 97% of birds and mammals living in the vast region of northwest Alaska will experience major habitat affects from climate change.

and you have all the makings of a “C”-rated sci-fi movie – done in black and white. It is utter nonsense to lay claims of moose mortality on global warming when, in fact, there no longer exists ANY scientific evidence that global warming has occurred. What data that has been given the public, has all proven to be manipulated, worthless information that only helps those, like Al Gore, looking to line their pockets.

In addition, ALL studies done on global warming in the past that made “predictions” directed at scaring the hell out of pseudo-journalists like the one inking this nonsense, proved to be, not only inaccurate, but so far off all credibility was lost except to the useful idiots who still choose to believe the sky is falling.

The Doomsday writer wants to utilize a “study” that “predicts” the world is coming to an end because it sells copies? How insane. Computer modeling has proven to be a waste of time, not so much that the computers can’t make predictions but because the information being fed into them is design to produce the results needed to generate income to continue fake studies. Doesn’t anybody get this?

What’s most sad about this kind of irresponsible reporting is, it does nothing to assist and educate with facts in order that real science can be conducted to find out about the relationships with moose and all things within its environment that effects survivability of the animal. Yelling and screaming that global warming is creating bugs and viruses that are killing moose in “droves,” is akin to yelling fire in a movie theater when someone lights a match.

Actual, normal science strongly indicates that changes in climate have existed since the beginning of recorded history, are cyclical, and seriously affected by the sun. There is no real science that proves or even strongly suggests that burning of fossil fuels and other causes of carbon dioxide generation is sending the earth into some kind of irreversible death spiral. Get over it!

More than likely, what we are seeing with moose is a cyclical event, fueled in part by cycles of localized weather patterns, over-protection of moose that causes too high a population, which prompts disease, over-protection of predators that create precipitous drops in prey specie numbers, and a host of other factors.

It is just plain irresponsible for this reporter or anybody else to embellish such utter nonsense. Isn’t it time to get back to real science for the good of all?

Share

Study Shows Insurance Companies Planning Rate Increases Based on Deer Collision “Modeling”

The actual title of a report published in the Maine Environmental News, reads: “Study shows Maine drivers 20% more likely to collide with a deer this year over last year.” Being that this conclusion appears to be based on computer generated projections, I see this study as nothing more than a means to justify what consumers can expect: rate increases.

The study says Maine people are 20% more likely to run into a deer this year compared to last year. The problem is, the only explanation State Farm gives for this might be buried in the next to last paragraph:

“Using its claims data and state licensed driver counts from the Federal Highway Administration, State Farm, the nation’s leading auto insurer, calculates the chances of any single American motorist striking a deer during the time frame of July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The data has been projected for the insurance industry as a whole, based on the State Farm personal vehicle market penetration within each state. The State Farm data is based on comprehensive and collision claims only. Claims involving policyholders with liability insurance coverage only are not included.”

This kind of tactic runs rampant throughout American society. Scare the hell out of people and then you can do whatever you want with them; in this case increase insurance rates due to “computer modeling projections” based on nothing more than bull*%&#

Share