December 18, 2017

Scientism, Encapsulation, Abstraction, Interface at Work

After publishing yesterday’s article on science modeling fraud, we are treated to an example of the process at work. Two Swedish “scientists” are charged with and found guilty of “scientific misconduct” because supposedly one of the scientists intentionally fabricated data and didn’t properly obtain necessary permits to “experiment” on fish. In addition, if you follow this link you will find many comments about the finding that further supports my claims about the brainwashing in place that makes “modeling” so effective. Whether you agree or disagree, try to get beyond that mindset in order to see the political blinders that just seem to persist at all levels and in everything we do.

As to the corrupt modeling process, clearly, it matters not to all those involved, including those offering comments, the topic of the research and if the claims made are factual or not and to what extent the corruption exists. There is little reason anymore to think that fraud and corruption aren’t deeply rooted in a rigged system.

The supposed “results” of this published study claimed that tiny particles of plastics in ocean waters were harmful to fish. Because to the corrupted rigged system, we don’t know if the intent of the research was to falsely provide “evidence” that this plastic existed and the harm it causes to fish for political purposes and monetary gain. On the other hand, there is no reason to believe that the charges brought against the researchers are not being done for other political purposes or monetary gain.

That’s how terribly corrupt the entire process has become. One person commented that they just assume that all published papers today are rooted in fraud and deception.

Nice!

Share

Al Gore’s “Energy Hog” House Devours up to 34 Times More Energy Than the Typical U.S. Home

Press Release from the National Center for Public Policy Research:

Star of Green Documentary An Inconvenient Sequel “Has Done Little to Prove His Commitment to the Cause in his Own Life”

Power Bills Show Gore Leading Double Life of Preaching Sacrifice to Others While Indulging Himself

Nashville, TN / Washington, D.C. – Al Gore’s Nashville estate devoured more than 21 times the amount of electricity than the average American household over the past year.  A National Center for Public Policy Research report on energy use at the property of the former vice president portrays Gore as a hypocrite who demands others sacrifice for his green zealotry while he enjoys energy without apparent care for cost or capacity.

Gore’s An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power environmental documentary debuts nationwide this Friday.

 Key findings of the National Center’s “Al Gore’s Inconvenient Reality” report, which draws on data obtained from the Nashville Electric Service (NES), include:

  • The 10,070-square-foot 20-room mansion, pool and security gate on Gore’s 2.09-acre estate outside Nashville used 230,889 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity during the last 12 months.  According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the typical American household uses just 10,812 kWh a year.

  • In September of 2016 alone, Gore’s estate guzzled 30,993 kWh of electricity – an amount more than 34 times the national monthly average.

  • Al Gore’s average annual power consumption at his Nashville home was a staggering 21.3 times more than the average American.  He also owns two other homes not included in this report.
  • The former vice president burns through more electricity to heat his pool each year than the average U.S. home uses in six years.

  • The 33 solar panels Gore installed on his home produce only 5.7 percent of the energy his home consumes annually.

  • With an average consumption of 22.9 kWh per square foot over the past year, Gore’s home classifies as an “energy hog” under standards developed by Energy Vanguard – a company specializing in energy efficiency methods.

“Al Gore has attained a near-mythical status for his frenzied efforts to propagandize global warming,” said National Center Senior Fellow Drew Johnson, the author of the report.  “At the same time, Gore has done little to prove his commitment to the cause in his own life. I’m not sure he even believes what he’s saying.”

“While Gore encourages people throughout the world to reduce their carbon footprint and make drastic changes to cut energy consumption, Gore’s own home electricity use has hypocritically increased to more than 21 times the national average the past year with no sign of slowing down,” Johnson said.

Electricity for Gore’s home, pool and security gate comes from NES and is largely derived from coal and nuclear power – with just 3.2 percent generated by wind and solar alternatives.

Gore’s behavior conflicts with behaviors he suggests others follow.  On the website for his documentary, people are urged to “lower your carbon footprint” and advocate for renewable energy use.  It asks people to sign a “ Pledge to #BeInconvenient” that commits them to “switch my home… to 100% renewable energy,” persuade others “to pursue climate solutions” and buy tickets to his documentary.

“Like most sequels, Al Gore’s documentary and his lifestyle choices don’t live up to expectations,” said National Center President David A. Ridenour.  “Al Gore is asking Americans to make expensive and uncomfortable changes to adhere to his green goals, yet his electricity bills show he does not live the way he wants to impose on others.  He can’t just talk the talk – he must walk the walk.  And he has now failed at that twice.”

This is the second time Gore’s conspicuous consumption of power has been exposed.  In 2007, Johnson – then president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research – reported that Gore used over 220,000 kWh of electricity a year at the same property. This led Gore to install solar panels, a costly geothermal heating system and other alleged energy-saving home improvements.  Despite these renovations, his 2016-2017 electricity consumption is over 10,000 kWh more than a decade ago.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank.  Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations.  It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 60,000 active recent contributors.  Sign up for email updates here.  Follow us on Twitter at @NationalCenter for general announcements.  To be alerted to upcoming media appearances by National Center staff, follow our media appearances Twitter account at @NCPPRMedia.

 

Share

There Is No Validity In What Is Being Sold as “Climate Change” or “Global Warming”

Share

Inventor Of Fraudulent Temperature ‘Hockey Stick’ Is Humiliated In Canadian Court

Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.<<<Read More>>>

Share

The Climate Confederacy

After President Trump rejected the Paris Climate treaty, which had never been ratified by the Senate, the European Union announced that it would work with a climate confederacy of secessionist states. Scotland and Norway’s environmental ministers have mentioned a focus on individual American states. And the secessionist governments of California, New York and Washington have announced that they will unilaterally and illegally enter into a foreign treaty rejected by the President of the United States.

The Constitution is very clear about this. “No state shall enter into any treaty.” Governor Cuomo of New York has been equally clear. “New York State is committed to meeting the standards set forth in the Paris Accord regardless of Washington’s irresponsible actions.”

Cuomo’s statement conveniently comes in French, Chinese and Russian translations.

“It is a little bold to talk about the China-California partnership as though we were a separate nation, but we are a separate nation,” Governor Brown of California announced.

In an interview with the Huffington Post, the radical leftist described California as “a real nation-state”. <<<Read More>>>

Share

Red Wolf Criminal Enterprise Appears to Remain Unchanged

Man-government is a nonsustaining, useless and corrupt entity that destroys whatever it lays its hands to. Government epitomizes insanity – rinse and repeat. Our insanity comes from thinking we can change it.

But, perhaps it’s partly the blame of a dysfunctional Trump Administration that seems to screw up whatever it lays its hands to, along with the fact that within its dysfunction, Trump’s appointment of Ryan Zinke as head of the Interior Department, can’t seem to get off his lazy backside and announce his pick to head up the Fish and Wildlife Service. After all, it’s been over 4 months and counting. Is it at all possible a real leader at the USFWS wouldn’t even be making such ridiculous proposals at an absurd time like this? Don’t hold your breath.

One thing has become clear to those willing to take off their fake blinders and examine truth, is that Trump cannot and will not keep any of his campaign promises (lies) – but he is no different in that regard than any crooked politician who came before him – that the ALL are crooked. It is a requirement of the position. It has not yet become obvious to his supporters that his works to this point in time are all blather. He talks a big talk and achieves nothing. People don’t even read his Executive Orders and if they do, they can’t understand them. If he’s so mighty, what has changed? I’m thinking nothing has changed and nothing will change, although there was some hope, which is now rapidly waning, soon to be replaced by business as usual and how do we get through 4 or 8 years of thugs and gangsters? Rinse and repeat.

Evidently it is business as usual at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) where babysitters are sucking on their pacifiers and carrying out the corrupt work that preceded them. Talk the talk but then blow it off. An example of such is what to do about the fake Red Wolves?

The USFWS is proposing making some changes to the “10j” rule of the Endangered Species Act in order to do something to change the management strategy of trying to grow a fake red wolf and perpetuate it.

The proposal – or more accurately a request for comments in order to draw up a draft proposal – can be found at this link. Below I have included the portion of the request that contains the USFWS’s options and what they are leaning toward implementing.

In their background information, of course it is fraught with lies. As an example it reads that the USFWS made sure that any “red wolves” that drifted off government land was removed. We know that never happened and as a matter of fact there’s pretty good evidence the criminals at the USFWS knowingly released and/or relocated “red wolves” on private land, which was an illegal act. However, anyone should understand by now that the U.S. Government places themselves above the laws we citizen slaves are expected to follow.

In the proposal it appears the USFWS wants to grow more fake mongrel “red wolves” in “zoos and private” wolf sanctuaries to keep beefing up the population and creating “genetic diversity” among existing fake red wolves. The liars at the USFWS say their management plans will protect further “hybridization” of red wolves and coyotes. They can never do this with the plans they are formulating, and it doesn’t much matter because what they are perpetuating is nothing but semi wild mongrel dogs. Is it that government is that stupid or do they think all of us are stupid enough to think we will never know the difference? I put my money on the latter.

But what’s difficult to understand, but not from a criminal’s mindset, is how the USFWS can, with a straight face, even be considering any proposal for a change of management of red wolves when the U.S. Attorney General’s Office has documentation that proves that the USFWS knew the “red wolves” they were growing and fostering weren’t even red wolves at all? Last I knew, the Attorney General’s office was demanding some answers. (I can’t help but laugh.) This sounds like a corrupt attempt at enhancing the corrupt red wolf program as much as possible before any decisions are made, or that the USFWS, like all government agencies, don’t give a rats ass about laws, rule of law or what, if anything, the U.S. Attorney General’s office will or won’t do. It’s one big fraternity that’s part of the giant rigged system. It will NEVER change.

In addition to all of this, new studies and science – difficult to know if any of it is real – suggest that there never existed any such “subspecies” of red wolf in the first place.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

For more information on the evidence to suggest the USFWS knew their red wolves were fake and the non existence of red wolves, use this link and this link. For lots of links to information about the history of red wolves in North Carolina, follow this link.

Proposed Action and Possible Alternatives

In 2013, acknowledging growing concerns from private landowners regarding management of the NEP, the Service and North Carolina Resources Commission entered into a broad canid management agreement, recognizing steps were needed to improve management of the population. Subsequently, the Service contracted an independent evaluation of the NEP project in 2014 and of the entire red wolf recovery program in 2015. From these evaluations, it became clear that the current direction and management of the NEP project is unacceptable to the Service and all stakeholders.

As a result of the findings from the evaluations, the Service is considering a potential revision of the 1995 NEP final rule. Risks of continued hybridization, human-related mortality, continued loss of habitat due to sea level rise, and continued population decline are high and have led to poor prospects for the NEP. Further, the most recent PVA indicates that the viability of the captive population is below and declining from the original recovery plan diversity threshold of 90 percent and could be enhanced by breeding captive wolves with wolves from the NEP project area. Therefore, the Service is considering whether the NEP should be managed with the captive population as one meta-population, whereby individuals could be moved not only from captivity into the wild but also from the wild into captivity. Incorporating the NEP into a meta-population with the captive population will increase the size of the population and introduce the natural selection occurring in the NEP back into the captive population. Therefore, the Service is proposing to change the goal of the current NEP project from solely that of establishing a self- sustaining wild population to a goal of also supporting viability of the captive wolves of the red wolf breeding program (proposed action). Maintaining a wild population fully integrated with the captive wolves also will: (1) Allow for animals removed from the wild to support the necessary expansion of current and future wild reintroduced populations and to improve the genetic health of the captive-breeding program; (2) preserve red wolf natural instincts and behavior in the captive population gene pool; and (3) provide a population for continued research on wild behavior and management.

The proposed revision would recognize that the size, scope, and management of the NEP will be focused on maintaining a wild population on Federal lands within Dare County, North Carolina and on protecting the species by increasing the number and genetic diversity of wolves in captivity. These revisions will allow removal of isolated packs of animals from non-Federal lands at the landowners’ request, incorporation of these animals into the wild/captive metapopulation, and better management of the remaining wild animals in accessible areas to minimize risks of hybridization. Management of wolves occupying Federal lands in Dare County will include population monitoring, animal husbandry, and control of coyotes and hybrids.

The proposed revision would authorize the movement of animals between the captive and wild populations in order to increase the number of wolves in the captive-breeding program and maintain genetic diversity for both captive and wild wolves. This means the captive wolves and the NEP will be managed as one single meta-population.

The draft environmental review under NEPA will consider consequences of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action. We have identified several management alternatives for the NEP:

(1) Maintain the NEP project in its current state. In other words, we would make no revisions to the current 10(j) rule.

(2) Publish a rule eliminating the NEP project. Under this alternative, the red wolves found in the wild would retain their status as a federally listed “endangered” species under the Act.

(3) Revise the existing NEP. We may consider revisions to the current 10(j) rule that vary from the proposed action.

Share

Environmentalists Use Photoshop and Fraud to Deceive

“Watts Up With That has a funny instance of warmist deception. You may have seen the headline, I did: Antarctica hits record high temperature at balmy 63.5°F. Where? Base Esperanza. Where is Base Esperanza in relation to what we normally think of as Antarctica? A long, long distance away:”<<<Read More>>>

Of course at least elements of the claims of photoshopping and fraud to promote Environmentalism are true. And yesterday, we learn that non government organizations such as Greenspeace admit their fraud and deception, claiming it to be a matter of “free speech” and expressing of themselves in a “figurative” manner.

“includes telling the court that its claims about Resolute being “forest destroyers,” responsible for a “caribou death spiral and extinction” and myriad other vilifications, were all just marketing hype. “The challenged statements are no more than opinion based on disclosed facts,” Greenpeace International’s lawyers explained in their latest motion to dismiss the RICO suit.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

By Funding Trophy Wolf Hunts, We’re Destroying Real Game Hunts

wolfutah*Editor’s Note* – This post first appeared on this website on October 8, 2014. It was requested of me to republish it as a means of updating the importance of the article as a prediction of the future.

It seems just a short while ago that wolf (re)introduction happened – 1995 and 1996. A lot of water has passed under the bridge and as the water moved downstream, it has blended in with a lot of other water, not becoming lost but perhaps unrecognizable.

As most of you know, I’m writing a book about wolves. Actually it’s really not about wolves other than to point out the obvious behaviors of the animal. The book is more about the corruption. However, in working to put all this information together, I’ve come across some things that I had written about in which I had actually forgotten.

It really began in early 2009, when there was a glimmer of hope that wolves might come off the Endangered list and residents in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming could begin killing the animal to get it back down to 100 wolves as promised in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. What? Had you forgotten?

Around about that same time, I began reading about the plans Idaho was going to begin formulating in preparation for wolf hunts. I said then that utilizing a season for “trophy” wolf hunting would not work.

I wrote a five-part series that I know some of you have read, perhaps more than once, called “To Catch a Wolf” – an historical account of the extreme difficulty people had throughout history trying to control wolves to stop them from killing livestock and attacking people.

The real joke was when Idaho officials, in a fraudulent attempt to convince anyone who would blindly listen, that trophy hunting wolves, was going to protect the elk, deer and moose herds. This did not happen. As a matter of fact, it so much did not happen, that Idaho Fish and Game took to helicopters to gun down wolves in the Lolo Region because officials were willing to admit there was a wolf problem….or maybe they were just placating the sportsmen. They killed 5 wolves and yet somehow they want sportsmen to believe that a trophy hunting season will protect the game herds?

The myth here is that increasing or decreasing wolf tags will grow or shrink elk, deer and moose herds. Sorry, but controlling elk, deer and moose tags controls elk, deer and moose herds. Select-harvesting a handful of wolves does nothing to protect game herds.

Why, then, are Idaho sportsmen continuing to fund a fraudulent trophy wolf hunting season that may actually be causing the further destruction of the elk, deer and moose they so much wish to protect and grow?

On November 30, 2012, I wrote and published the following article. I took the liberty to embolden some statements I wish to now more fully draw your attention to.

Trophy Hunting Season on Wolves Destroying More Elk, Moose and Deer?

Recently I read a comment made by Bob Ream, chairman of the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) Commission, state that:

We [MFWP] have implemented more and more aggressive wolf harvests. We also increased lion harvests considerably this year.

The word aggressive is certainly an overused adjective used much in the same fashion as say a male peacock when he displays his tail feathers. In the context used in the quote above, I’m assuming Mr. Ream intended his use of the word aggressive to mean something to be proud of, a feat of accomplishment or something related. But when talking about wolves, killing, attacks, predation, hunting, trapping, disease and every aspect associated with gray wolves, “implementing[ed] more and more aggressive wolf harvests” kind of rings a bit hollow.

In its simplest form, wolves, at least under the existing conditions in most of Montana, Idaho and Wildlife, grow and expand at a rate of anywhere between 20% and 30%, I am told and have read as well. Estimates of wolf populations mean little except in political and emotional battles because nobody knows how many there are and they are lying if they tell you otherwise. For the sake of argument, I have read that the tri-state region of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have at least 6,000 wolves. On the top end I’ve heard 15,000 but I’m going to guess that might be high but then again I don’t live there and spend time in the woods.

If there were 6,000 wolves then math tells us that 1200 – 1800 wolves should be killed each year just to sustain the population at 6,000; and states like Montana, who according to Bob Ream, are aggressively killing more wolves.

But now the question has been brought up that perhaps states offering hunting and trapping seasons, based on the principle of “trophy” and “big game” hunting and trapping, might be causing even more game animals, like elk, moose and deer, to be killed. Is this possible?

It was nearly 4 years ago that I wrote a series, “To Catch a Wolf“. Much of the purpose of that series and other related articles, was to explain how difficult it is to kill a wolf; historically and globally. It’s one of the hardest things to do over a prolonged period of time and that’s why I chuckle at comments like Bob Ream’s when he describes the MFWP actions toward killing wolves as aggressive. There is NOTHING aggressive about trophy hunting wolves.

The process was long and mostly wrought with illegal actions and corruption, but eventually, Montana, Idaho and Wyoming got the infamous and controversial gray wolf removed from protections of the Endangered Species Act and trophy hunting seasons commenced; after all, wasn’t that the target goals of each of the states’ fish and game departments?

And so how’s that “aggressive” hunting and trapping going to reduce wolf populations?

If any of this isn’t complicated and wrought with emotion and irrational thinking enough already, in an email exchange I received today, the idea was presented that hunting a token number of wolves, in other words, managing them as a game species and classified as a trophy animal, might actually be only amounting to breeding a healthier, less stressful wolf that will eat more elk, deer and moose and become an even larger creature than it already is, further capable of killing more and bigger prey.

This idea is based in science, although those who don’t like the science disregard it. The science is the topic of wolf size. Most people are of the thought that a wolf’s size is determined by the species or subspecies the wolf comes from. I’m not going to pretend I have a full grasp of this science but will pass on that the essence of wolf size is determined mostly by food supply.

Consider then this premise to manage wolves as a big game species, which is what is being done in Montana and Idaho. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, which includes managing game for surplus harvest, has worked marvelously well over the years, producing in places too many of certain game species. We certainly don’t want that for wolves as the proportion of wolves to prey/game species will soon get all out of whack. Our only hope then, is that the fish and game departments will fail as miserably managing wolves as they have elk, moose and mule/whitetail deer.

There is a reason why honest wildlife managers classify bona fide game animals as such and coyotes (and it should be also wolves) varmints to be shot and killed on site. It’s the only way to keep them at bay. This would be considered an aggressive move toward wolf control. Anything, short of an all out organized program to extirpate the wolf, would work just dandy and would never danger the future existence of this animal.
End

In the years that I have written about wolves, wolf “management” and the political nonsense that goes hand in hand with it, it certainly appears to me that there has become quite an effort among sportsmen to protect THEIR “trophy” wolf hunts. Is that in the best interest of actually regaining a vibrant elk, deer and moose population, that is supposed to be managed for surplus harvest, according to Idaho code?

In its most basic form, at least ask yourself how that “aggressive” trophy wolf hunting is effecting the elk, deer and moose herds? At the same time, what has become and continues to become of those elk tags? There just aren’t enough “trophy” wolf hunters to be effective and supporting the farce perpetuated by Idaho Fish and Game isn’t helping. It’s the same as buying a fifth of gin for a gin-soaked homeless fool.

As was relayed to me today, it seems the, “participants are in a race for the final bull elk or big buck in various units.” That’s the direction it seems we are headed.

Here’s a mini refresher course in promised wolf management. When the Final Environmental Impact Statement was approved, leading to the Final Rule on Wolf Reintroduction, the citizens of the Northern Rocky Mountain Region, where wolves were to be (re)introduced, were promised several things. First, we were promised that wolves would be “recovered,” a viable, self-sustaining population, when 10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves existed in three separate wolf management zones for three consecutive years. Those numbers were achieved by 2003. What happened? Nothing but lawsuits and wolves didn’t finally get delisted until 2011 due to legislative action.

All promises made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were based on 30 breeding pairs and 300 wolves. They lied!

Second, citizens of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming were promised that wolves would have no measurable impact on wild game herds. The only thing that might possibly be needed was a slight 10% or less reduction in cow elk tags should the occasion arise for the need to boost elk production in exceptional cases.

So, I ask. How many elk tags have been lost since those promises were made? As a matter of fact, all promises made were reneged on. There is no reason to believe or support anything promised us by government. Stop giving government money to run their con game. At this rate game animals will all be gone soon enough and no hunting opportunities will prevail….except possibly trophy wolf tags.

What will it be. As the old saying goes, “Pay me now or pay me later.”

Share

Dr Fred Goldberg Squashes Climate Alarmism

Share

Good Riddance (and don’t let the door hit you in the…)

by James Beers

Two years ago I wasted quite a bit of time opposing the Minnesota DNR decree to impose a ban on using any lead ammunition on State Wildlife Areas.  During this thorough waste of time (it was a simple government decree in a decree-friendly state based on nonsense with no possibility of any change from the get-go) I trekked to downtown St. Paul to the DNR Headquarters for a “Hearing” and a chance to “testify”.

What a circus. The 40 or 50 attendees were divided by sex and costumes.  On “my” half sat males over 50 sitting in groups of friends all decked out in wool shirts; they were the opposition.  On the other half sat a gaggle of females under 50 that probably thought that a gunstock was something listed on the Stock Exchange: they were obviously all acquainted with each other and each was decked out in “professional” clothes suitable for CEO-level executives recently departed from their offices or some expensive urban watering hole for this important meeting; they were the supporters of the ban.

There were a few anomalies in the female supporters group.  First there was the DNR “chief” that obviously knew each lady and wandered amongst them like a movie star.  Then there was the old man dressed in impeccable Orvis duds that looked real “outdoorsy” as he self-identified as a “hunter”.

Last but not least was an older lady in fairly grubby clothes that identified herself and her plea as an “Eagle Rescue biologist”.  Her emotional “testimony”, that was allowed to exceed the time limit unlike the rest of us, was full of tales of Bald eagles injured by “hunters” and brought to her Rescue venue located on a heavily used wintering eagle stretch of the Mississippi.  She even shared X-rays of eagles showing “lead” pellets that were “killing them”.  She received an ovation at her conclusion.

What she failed to mention was that the fact of lead or some other pellet metal was immaterial; lead pellets or bullets imbedded in muscle or other non-organ tissue is benign.  You or I or an eagle or a loon or a duck for that matter so afflicted may live a long life or die soon depending on the wound, not the presence of lead, since lead is not absorbed into the organs and blood (where accumulations can be fatal) when it is simply lodged in muscle or other non-organ tissue.  The lead ammunition bugaboo is based on waterfowl hyperbole and over estimation where ducks and geese, et al have CROPS full of GRIT (pebbles, shot and other small round and hard items they must constantly replenish) that they use to grind their hard plant food like seeds for digestion.  Lead shot (less than claimed) is often ground up and passes through the digestive system with the seeds and if absorbed over a long period can prove fatal.  This “climate-change”-like anecdotal over-estimation successfully justified banning lead for any waterfowl hunting over two decades ago.

Then the same folks used it to justify banning lead fishing tackle because loons were dying from “lead poisoning”.  When I tried to explain to a couple of Minnesota fishermen asking for others to turn in all their lead tackle a few years ago that the miniscule number of loons documented to have toxic lead levels ALSO had digestive systems plugged with fishing TACKLE (hooks, leaders, line) and were in fact starving to death thanks to the plugged digestive system and NOT LEAD, they got irate and told me to get lost.  You see loons HAVE NO CROP AND THEREFORE NO LEAD GRIT because they are fish eaters with digestive systems more like ours than their seed-eating cousins.  When a loon finds a bait minnow on a broken line (with tackle attached) on a snag, it swallows the minnow and the attached tackle that eventually knots up in the digestive system and starves the bird to death as its digestive juices flow freely and absorb as much of the lead as possible.

So let us return to the meeting about lead ammunition on MN State Wildlife Areas and the ladies emotional appeal on behalf of eagles.  Eagles don’t have, nor need, crops.  Eagles don’t need nor gather grit.  Eagles eat fish and meat.  So, all the eagle and lead-pellet X-rays that brought tears to our eyes that winter evening were simple deceptions.  Eagles that die from or are maimed by lead (or any other shot or bullet for that matter) either die from the wound; are disabled by the wound; or recover to stir all MN progressive’s patriotism as they soar above our waterways.

I remembered that little old lady recently and wondered where she is now as I read the following newspaper article titled, “Wind-turbine rule would allow for eagle deaths”.

Having been sensitized to the “fact” that no sacrifice (like ammunition cost and effectiveness or traditional family-heirloom weapon use) is too much to ask to “save” one, much less multiple eagles, from death or wounding I was shocked by the title.  Seeing men and kids investigated, prosecuted, fined, jailed (and prohibited from future voting and gun ownership unlike current prisoners incarcerated for “non-violent” drug crimes being released to vote and bloat growing recidivism statistics) and otherwise marginalized for shooting, mounting or possessing a Bald or Golden Eagle – all at great government expense – I read the article that upset me far more evidently than all the little old ladies or urban professional ladies or the old guys and bureaucrats that hang around them.

Here are the relevant parts of the article with my comments italicized in parentheses.

Wind-turbine rule would allow for eagle deaths

The Obama administration on Wednesday (14 December 2016) finalized a rule that lets wind-energy companies operate high-speed turbines for up to 30 years — even if means killing or injuring thousands of federally protected bald and golden eagles.

(THOUSANDS??  30 YEARS??  Those wind “farms” have been killing millions of “Protected” birds every spring and fall for 30 years already with nary a scream from all these do-gooders.  Not only were federal bureaucrats paid handsomely to “Protect” them, the bureaucrats of USFWS, the State bureaucrats, the “conservation” organizations, the bird outfits, the radical environmentalists and even the little old Eagle Rescue lady were all AWOL as they lied about lead to discourage hunting and fishing and treated their fellow citizens and their cherished pursuits far worse than government treats terrorists or incarcerated drug smugglers, sellers and perverters of America’s youth.)

    Under the new rule, wind companies and other power providers will not face a penalty if they kill or injure up to 4,200 bald eagles, nearly four times the current limit. Deaths of the more rare golden eagles would be allowed without penalty so long as companies minimize losses by taking steps such as retrofitting power poles to reduce the risk of electrocution.

(How come ranchers weren’t offered a silly “out” by these “concerned” bureaucrats like putting out eagle food or working at an eagle “rescue” center when they killed A golden eagle killing a lamb or a calf or a dog?  Maybe they could attach an electrical shocker to their dog or a lamb or a calf or a kid and let a golden eagle swoop in and get shocked when it grabs them?  It doesn’t work with wolves but then we could “test” it for years until the ranchers are gone. Just below you will see that the government won’t discuss or release eagle deaths data; so how do we know 4,200 is “four times” the current limit?)

     The new rule will conserve eagles while also spurring development of a pollution-free energy source intended to ease global warming, a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s energy plan, said Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe. 

(Pollution-free”??  4200 dead Bald eagles and an untold number of golden eagles minced up and lying about is a certain level of accumulated tissue and genes that is hardly describable as “pollution-free”.  The next time some jerk or jerkette bullies you or your children into a “come to Gaia” moment to deny any doubts about global warming, remember this bit of national disgrace because this bureaucrat justifies a magnitude of eagle killing unknown since federal ”protection” of eagles became a federal duty as a good because it eases “global warming.  As a nod to public information, this bureaucrat “Director” was a radical political staff Director in the US House and lost his job when Newt and the Republicans took control of the House 2 years into the reign of Clinton.  He was quickly picked up by USFWS in a top job and given charge of the federal Pittman Robertson Excise Taxes on arms and ammunition intended for state wildlife agencies and their wildlife programs.  Over the next two years $45 to 60 Million went missing, and per a General Accounting Office Audit was used to insert wolves into the Upper Rockies and open an office in California, both of which the Congress had refused to fund or authorize.  This effete environmentalist spent the Bush years in a non-job post and was then made Director under Obama.  The money was never replaced, state governments went AWOL, and no one was charged after Two Congressional hearings just before a Presidential election.  Yes, such a person is no surprise in the middle of this debacle.)

    “No animal says America like the bald eagle,” Ashe said in a statement, calling recovery of the bald eagle “one of our greatest national conservation achievements.” The new rule attempts to build on that success, Ashe said, adding that the Fish and Wildlife Service is trying to balance energy development with eagle conservation. 

(If this isn’t straight out of George Orwell’s description of Newspeak, i.e. meaningless babble that cannot be challenged or understood, then I don’t know what is.)

   Wind power has increased significantly since Obama took office, and wind turbines as tall as 30-story buildings are rising across the country. The wind towers have spinning rotors as wide as a passenger jet’s wingspan, and blades reach speeds of up to 170 mph at the tips, creating tornado-like vortexes.

The birds are not endangered species but are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The laws prohibit killing, selling or otherwise harming eagles, their nests or eggs without a permit. 

(“30-story buildings”; “passenger jet’s wingspan”; “170 mph blades”: all built in enormous acreages EXACTLY where birds migrate and soar because that is where the best and most persistent winds have occurred for centuries.  Who knew such a situation was or even could be harming birds?  No wonder NO media or environmentalists or professors said anything.  Luckily we have the likes of the USFWS enforcing these bird protection laws and state DNR’s to do thing like manipulate “Rescue” ladies to regale us with why we should stop using economical and efficient ammunition for hunting because we might kill an eagle unknowingly. Al Capone had nothing on these guys.)

    It’s unclear what toll wind energy companies are having on eagle populations, although Ashe said as many 500 golden eagles a year are killed by collisions with wind towers, power lines, buildings, cars and trucks. Thousands more are killed by gunshots and poisonings.
Reporting of eagle mortality is voluntary, and the Interior Department refuses to release the information. 

(Raise your hand if you are surprised that the Administration that gave us the Hillary/ATF/Gun Smuggling/UN Small Arms Treaty Attempt/ Fast & Furious scandal; the Lois Lerner/IRS record destruction scandal; Private computer servers in basements; and just recently refused to explain computer hacking by Russia to Congress and magically disagreement between 17 government intelligence agencies disappeared while the President says he knows all about in a press conference as he scoots out to a 17-day vacation in Hawaii – also gives us:

“It’s unclear what toll wind energy companies are having on eagle populations.”

Ashe said as many 500 golden eagles a year are killed by collisions with wind towers, power lines, buildings, cars and trucks. Thousands more are killed by gunshots and poisonings”.  This latter is a lie.  If there was anything near this USFWS would have been screaming to Congress for more employees and budget and the “Establishment” would have granted it immediately for fear of being called “anti- America’s symbol”.

Reporting of eagle mortality is voluntary, and the Interior Department refuses to release the information. These guys must have taken public information classes in Moscow.  They should be fired for such illegal public employee arrogance to cover up…??)

    The new rule is set to take effect in mid-January, days before Obama leaves office. President-elect Donald Trump could change the rule or scrap it, but the process would likely takes months or years.

(Wow, can you imagine what things would be like if President Obama hadn’t promised President-elect Trump an honest and friendly transition of power?)

    Ashe declined to be interviewed, but he said in a blog entry Wednesday the total number of eagles killed per year is likely to be in the hundreds, not thousands. 

(How does a “public” “servant” decline” to tell the public about public business that has NO security (other than the tushes of the said bureaucrats) implications?  This swamp not only needs to be “drained”; it needs to be tiled and planted for the benefit of those paying for it!)

    Michael Hutchins of the American Bird Conservancy said Wednesday that his group has “some serious concerns” that the new rule will not do not enough to sustain populations of threatened eagles. 

(The “conservation” organizations are full of these guys.  They are like draft dodgers telling little kids what they did “in the war”.  I include here all those urban “useful idiots” that harm their rural fellow citizens for their own selfish imaginings and even the sincere little old ladies that babble on and are never challenged like some minority spouting nonsense or a terrorist-looking man or women stranger that shows up in some public gathering wearing heavy clothing and a backpack.  All of them intend to force the rest of us to submit to th+++eir vision of a society they run and we either submit or lose our rights or worse.

Yesterday I received an email telling me I was accusing Obama and his Administration unjustly of doing bad things as they went out the door.  The writer inferred that I must be a racist to be so anti-Obama.  Well, make your own decision here but I, for one, am glad to be done with them.  And as I said in the title, “don’t let the door hit you in the &$$ on the way out!”

Jim Beers

17 December 2016

Share