San Juan Mountains

San Juan Mountains
San Juan Mountains: Grenadier Range

Friday, December 23, 2016

Christmas Is For Christians

A lot of Evangelicals become upset this time of year and they often speak about "taking Christmas back" or "putting Christ back into Christmas."  Although I understand what they are saying when they utter those phrases it seems to me they are operating with a false presupposition about the nature of religious belief in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika today.  The biggest false assumption made by those who want to take Christmas back is that a true biblical conception of Christmas actually existed in the minds and souls of the citizens who populate this country in the first place.
The SDA has never been a Christian country, despite what Evangelicals love to believe.  It is impossible to ratify a constitution that legitimizes and mandates a secular civil government and be a Christian nation at the same time.  It is impossible to reject the law of God in civil government and claim to be a Christian nation.  The law of a nation always reveals its operational deity.  It is impossible to require no religious test for those who seek to rule over us and claim to be a Christian nation at the same time.  The total number of true Christians who live in this land has no doubt fluctuated throughout the years but, make no mistake, this has never been a God-honoring Christian nation.
Joseph Sobran writes this about how Christians in this country don't fully appreciate the true nature of Jesus' teachings, as well as biblical Christianity, and its opposition to the civil government of the SDA, "Sometimes I think the anti-Christian forces take Christ more seriously than most nominal Christians do. The Western world, including many of those who consider themselves Christians, has turned Christmas into a bland holiday of mere niceness. If you don’t get into the spirit, you’re likely to be called a Scrooge....Nice? That’s hardly the word for Jesus. He performed miracles of love and mercy, but he also warned of eternal damnation, attacked and insulted the Pharisees, and could rebuke even people who adored him in words that can only make us cringe....Such a strong, indeed unique, personality could only meet strong — and unique — resistance. This is why Christians shouldn’t resent the natural resistance of those who refuse to celebrate his birth. In their way, those people are his witnesses too."
Christmas is not for God-hating pagans.  If God-hating pagans want to celebrate some warm fuzzy midwinter event by hypocritically speaking about peace, joy, love and goodwill towards men, let them do it on their own time.  It will only add to the weight of their eternal punishment.  Why should true Christians care about what other people do in the name of Christ?  Jesus Himself will deal with them.  We should leave them alone or call them to repent of their sins and let Jesus deal with their blasphemies.
I watched "A Charlie Brown Christmas" again last night.  Your probably read about the government school teacher in Texas who ran afoul of the powers that be when she posted Linus' speech, taken from Luke 2 in the Bible, on the door to her room.  The principal ordered her to take it down.  A compromise was eventually reached and she was permitted to leave the words from the Bible on her door.  I would not have allowed that.  If I worked for the government I would enforce a strict separation of the Christian church and the government schools.  No Bible verses would ever be allowed in my school in any form.  Any student who quoted the Bible would be expelled for the sin of intolerance.  But that is just me.  I try to live consistently with my beliefs although I realize that most people just want to experience good feelings throughout life.
As much as I love Linus' speech in the television show from the 1960s, the writers left one important part of the passage out.  Luke 2: 13- 14 says, "And suddenly there appeared with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying 'Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased.'"  I have highlighted the part that everyone always leaves off.  Were you aware that the phrase "peace among men on earth" is incomplete?  Did you know that the angels added the extremely important qualifier, "with whom He is pleased" to the group he blesses with peace?  Most people are not.  Indeed, most people would consider me to be harsh, intolerant, extreme, and unloving simply for pointing out this important truth.  God does not grant peace to men on earth with whom He is not pleased and, as far as I can tell, He is not pleased with most people.
On the contrary, when we seek out God's opinion about the citizens of the earth we find this rather caustic analysis, "There is none righteous, not even one.  There is none who understands.  There is none who seeks for God.  All have turned aside, together they have become useless.  There is none who does good, not even one."  You will find that passage in Romans 3.
The history of mankind is not one of peace.  It is one of war, ceaseless, endless, destructive war.  The history of the SDA is exactly the same.  Precious few are the years this country has not been at war with some other foreign land.  Why do men wage war endlessly? God answers that question as well.  The answer is found in James 4: 1-3.  It says, "What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you?  Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members?  You lust and do not have, so you commit murder.  And you are envious and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel.  You do not have because you do not ask.  You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it on your pleasures."  That sums up human nature pretty well, don't you think?  It also sums up Amerikan foreign policy and the Amerikan political process with perfection. 
A Christian is a person who agrees with God about His opinion of men and who then makes the voluntary decision to repent of his sin and promise to be obedient to the Word of God for the rest of his life.  A Christian is a person who can be forgiven of his sin because of the propitiatory sacrifice of the sinless Son of God.  A Christian is a person who celebrates the incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity in the God-Man Jesus the Messiah.  That is what a Christian celebrates at Christmas and if you are not a Christian you would be wise to not pretend to be one this time of year.  Be true to yourself.  Pagans should celebrate their utterly ridiculous belief that men are basically good and able to save themselves by doing good deeds that outweigh their bad deeds which then forces God to allow them into heaven.  Worshipers of the civil government of the SDA should praise their career politicians and lobby them for special privileges in the coming year, all in the name of equity and fairness of course.  Christians should fall on their knees and thank God that He sent His Son to be their savior.  Christmas is really only for Christians because only Christians understand what it means.  There is nothing wrong with that.

Note to regular readers:  I am taking next week off.  I will return in the new year.  Until then, Merry Christmas to Christians and a short prayer for the rest of you that you will repent before it is too late.

Thursday, December 22, 2016

Global Warming Kills Donner And Blitzen

In an article entitled "Rudolph is Shrinking:  Climate Change is Shrinking Santa's Reindeer," author Laura Geggei makes the following assertions:
  • Reindeer are shrinking, and it's not because they're on a diet for the holidays. Rather, climate change is making it difficult for them — and their gestating fetuses — to survive extreme winters, new research shows.
  • The findings are the culmination of a 16-year study on the reindeer living Svalbard, a Norwegian archipelago located between Norway and the Arctic. In 1994, the adult reindeer in Svalbard weighed an average of 120 lbs. (55 kilograms), but in 2010, they weighed less than 108 lbs. (49 kg), on average — a 10- to 12-percent drop in weight.
  • The drop in weight was linked to warmer winters and summers...But warm winter temperatures have increasingly brought rain, not snow, Albon said. Then, when temperatures drop, the wet ground freezes like an ice rink, with the reindeer's tasty lichen stuck beneath the ice. Unable to get to their food, hundreds, if not thousands, of reindeer die.
  • In the winter, over the 20 years we've been working there [Svalbard], the temperature has gone up 9 degrees Celsius [16.2 degrees Fahrenheit]
  • The warmer summer adds a complication, Albon said. When Svalbard is warm and sprouting with food, reindeer are more likely to mate. That means the reindeer population is growing despite the frequent, severe ice-rink winters, he said.
Did you get all that?  I will come back to the specifics in a moment.  But first, consider this climatological data about Norway that I extracted from a global-warming friendly website:
  • For the period 1900-2008 as a whole, the annual mean temperature in Norway has increased by about 0.9°C. Dependent on geographical region, the increase in an­nual temperature varies from 0.5 to 1.1°C. The largest increase is found during spring, where the mean tem­perature has increased by 0.7-1.4°C
And this comment from another website:
  • When it comes to the normal temperature distribution in winter, two main features are evident: firstly, the mean temperature in the winter months are above freezing all along the coast from Lista (Vest-Agder) to the Lofoten area (Nordland). Secondly, the lower inland areas, both in the southern and northern part of Norway, have very low mean temperatures in winter. The Finnmark Plateau is the coldest area with mean monthly temperatures around -15 °C
The panic-stricken article prematurely announcing the deaths of Donner and Blitzen seems designed to add another voice to the cacophony of screams decrying the alleged fact that global warming is going to kill everything on the surface of the earth in the next few years.  I found the article by doing a Google search entitled, "What real harm has global warming done in 2016?"  The group of researchers who wrote the article were looking for something else when they noticed the average weight of a particular population of reindeer had dropped over the past two decades.  They conclude that the average weight has dropped due to global warming but does that conclusion make sense in light of their own observations?
They claim that the temperature in the area they are working has increased by 9 degrees C over the twenty years they have been working there but their own global-warming friendly temperature records indicate that the mean temperature in Norway has only increased by 0.7 to 1.4 degrees C in the past 108 years.  Even allowing for regional differences it is very hard to believe that a real 9 degree temperature change has occurred in their region of study.  Even granting that for some unknown reason their region has really experienced that severe of a temperature change, it is clearly limited to that region and of no value when describing conditions throughout all of Norway.
Apparently a series of ice storms in the winter that have been peculiar to that archipelago have caused the available forage to decrease, resulting in the starvation of more reindeer during the winter season than previous average starvation rates during the winter.  Yet, as the comment about temperature distribution throughout Norway indicates, coastal areas routinely experience above freezing temperatures during the winter months.  If these areas are now experiencing a higher than average incidence of freezing events it would seem to be the case that temperatures in the area have gone down rather than up.
I find it fascinating that the overall population of the reindeer in this area is increasing, despite their smaller size.  The author readily admits that the warmer summers are a "complication" but why should that be so?  Would not warmer summers allow for more biomass to grow, thus allowing the reindeer to consume even more food and grow even larger?  Why are they convinced that the smaller size is directly tied to global warming?  I believe I can make a plausible empirical argument that global warming should not only increase the population of reindeer but also their relative size.  If they are shrinking in size there must be another, localized, cause for that reality.
Ultimately, even if the arguments made by the author are true and global warming is creating a larger population of smaller reindeer in an obscure part of Norway, what difference does that make to the price of tea in China?  This is simply another example of their god in action.  I have never met a single environmentalist who was not committed to the religion of evolution.  Survival of the fittest and natural selection in light of climate change determine the direction of evolution.  Clearly the larger population of smaller reindeer are adapting to their environment better than the smaller population of larger reindeer.  Why is that a problem?  Why should that be a reason to write another article complaining about the evils of global warming?  Ultimately, why should anyone give a hoot?  I certainly don't.
By the way, I mentioned my Google search for actual harm done in 2016 by global warming above. I didn't find a single article describing any real harm done to anyone or anything living in any part of the world in 2016.  I found thousands of articles about lots of ice dying but little more than that.  Maybe global warming is actually a good thing for the living creatures that populate the earth?  I sure think so.  And now I am going to go for a drive around town for a while.  My only goal is to put more carbon emissions into the air and increase the rate of global warming.  I am tired of the cold winters around here.

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

You Must Watch "Dateline"

I will readily admit to being a fan of the television show Dateline.  It is on Friday night and usually features a story of one spouse murdering another, usually for money and almost always due to an ongoing adulterous affair.  That, however, is not the reason I find the show so mesmerizing.  I watch the show to witness, first hand and in real life, the immoral operations of the cops and the district attorneys responsible for administering justice in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika.  If you are still unconvinced that the judicial system in this God-hating country is corrupt to the very core, you need to watch the show.
Last Friday's show was a case in point.  In a rare move, the show was divided into two one hour segments.  After watching the show I seriously suspect that that was done on purpose as a means to illustrate just how evil the cops and district attorneys in this land are.  The first story was a follow up on a man who was convicted of murdering his wife, on slim circumstantial evidence alone, who had served 15 years of his prison sentence when he was finally given a new trial, his fourth, and found not guilty.
The murdered wife was never found.  No murder weapon was ever found.  The only evidence against the husband was a small amount of blood on a carpet in the hallway that the DA claimed was evidence of massive blunt force trauma to the head of the deceased.  While doing their sterling detective work the cops assigned to the case ignored the testimony of a man who said he saw another man fighting with the wife just prior to her death, outside the family home and near where her car was found the next day.  He provided a solid description of the man and corroborating witnesses confirmed that the wife had been drinking heavily and playing sexual games with the man that night at a bar, as well as the fact that they left the bar together.  That man has long since disappeared.
Immediately after the woman was declared missing the cops swept in upon the husband and began their usual ritual of the psychoanalysis of his behavior.  According to them he did not behave the way a bereaved husband should behave.   Rather than doing some actual police work they harassed him and attempted to construct a circumstantial theory revolving around the blood on the rug that could get him convicted in a court of law.  The usual jury of dimwitted individuals intent upon seeing themselves on the news as members of the jury in a high profile case were selected.  And as usual, the jury found him guilty and sentenced him to prison.  He appealed two separate times and both times he was sent back to prison.  Finally, he appealed once more, using some legal maneuver that I did not understand that granted him the ability to do so, and agreed to waive his "right" to a jury trial.  The same evidence was presented in the same fashion as before and it took the judge about 20 minutes to declare him not guilty and set him free.  Fifteen years of his life had been stolen because the cops were lazy and the publicity seeking DA wanted a high profile conviction.
The second story is the reverse of the first.  You had to see it to believe it.  An air-headed prostitute, pretending to be a realtor, marries a convicted con man and they set up their home in a prestigious south Florida community.  The man is seriously trying to go straight and pay off the debts he owned from his prior conviction while his wife, the lisping air-head, is trying to hire a hit man to kill him so she can get his condo and his cash.  The situation becomes known to the police and they video her on several separate occasions attempting to hire a hit man for the job.  Eventually a cop posing as a hit man takes the job.
In a very fun series of events the woman comes home from her morning Orange Theory class to discover that her husband had been "killed."  She plays the role of the grieving wife to perfection, not knowing that her husband is alive and well and waiting for her at the police station.  She is taken to the station and the plot is revealed.  Rather than confessing her guilt she continues to assert her innocence and then proceeds to concoct three different stories, one for her original defense and two more for each appeal, about what had actually happened.  She was convicted all three times.  It was hard not to.  The evidence was considerably more than circumstantial.
After telling three different stories she is finally able to get another trial, I don't remember how that happened, in which her scum bag lawyers finally came up with a winning lie.  It just so happened that the television show Cops had filmed the entire scene as it went down.  Her story was now that she was a victim of a police set up.  According to her, the police set her up to have a good story for the television show to record.  She claimed that all of the video evidence was falsified and that she was a "spiritual" person who "loves God" tremendously.  Her lawyers made the same profession of faith.  She screened her jurors carefully and filled the box with more air-headed fools who believed her preposterous story and cut her loose.  It is hard to imagine anyone could be so stupid as to believe her story but it happened and a woman who attempted to murder her husband for cash is now walking about freely.
The SDA judicial system is in shambles.  Innocent people are being sent to prison based on nothing more than circumstantial evidence and a good story spun by aggressive DAs looking for the spotlight.  Meanwhile, low-life clumps of human detritus, known as defense attorneys, are getting clearly guilty people off scot-free by making up bizarre and unbelievable stories that play well to stupid jurors.  If there is one lesson to be learned from Dateline it is this....never talk to the cops, always lawyer up immediately, never consent to a search or an interview and do your level best to give the primary players in the judicial game absolutely no information about yourself or the circumstances you find yourself in. As they say, any information you give the cops will be used against you, even if it is only used to fabricate a preposterous story about how you murdered your wife.

Tuesday, December 20, 2016

It Is Christmas Time, A Perfect Time For Envy

Don't you just love the hypocrisy associated with Christmas?  People who hate God sing Christmas carols, thus increasing His wrath against them in the coming day of judgement if they fail to repent before they die.  People talk about love, peace and goodwill while fighting with each other in the shopping malls.  Families gather together to gossip about and slander one another.  People who only go to church services twice a year show up at church and the pastor, ever vigilant in his goal of increasing the membership rolls and the income to the church, preaches a bastardized and lie filled sermon designed to reinforce each man's view of himself; namely that God loves him and has a wonderful plan for his life this Christmas season.  Christmas is also a wonderful time for the expression of that lovely character quality known as envy.  Let me tell you a little Christmas tale today about envy and the Chipotle restaurant chain.
Chipotle is in trouble.  Third quarter revenues were down 22% y/y and the stock price has also dropped 26% this year.  All of these woes originally stemmed from the problem Chipotle had a year or so ago with quality control in regards to the food being served.  If I remember correctly, and I probably do not (and I am too lazy to look it up), some folks died after eating poisoned food from a Chipotle restaurant.  I don't remember how many folks died but I do recall it was a big news item for a month or so as Chipotle engaged upon several promotional stunts in an attempt to rehabilitate its reputation.  To date none of them have worked.
The Sunday Denver Post contained a story, in the Business Section, detailing Chipotle's woes.  That story described how Chipotle's woes no longer come from the ancient history of food poisoning but from a recent history of poor service and inferior quality food.  Gary Alfred, of Denver, responded to that story in yesterday's Letters to the Editor section of the paper.  Here is what Gary had to say, "It has been quite a while since I last visited my local Chipotle restaurant.  Improving the guest experience, as outlined in the Denver Post, is not something likely to encourage me to return. Such an experience is expected. Rather, if the new sole CEO Steve Ells would forgo his $10 million-plus annual salary and pledge to use the money to provide end-of-year bonuses to the restaurant's line workers, that would be quite welcoming.  With all the negativity surrounding the company, such a positive gesture around this holiday season would go a long way towards raising the profile of the company as a quality and responsible neighborhood employer."
Chipotle has 60,000 employees.  $10 million divided by 60,000 is $167/employee.  The average "team member" at Chipotle makes $25,000/year.  The average store manager makes $50,000/year.  Gary's proposed bonus would make up 0.67% of the average team members salary and 0.34% of the average store manager's salary.  Although I am sure nobody would turn his nose up at a free $167, do you really believe people would flock to Chipotle restaurants because the people working there each earned a year end bonus of $167?  That proposition stretches credulity.  Indeed, I suspect if Chipotle actually did give each employee a year end bonus of $167 the store would be castigated in the press for giving out such a stingy year end bonus.
Chipotle has a market capitalization of $11.3 billion. In the last fiscal year the company had gross revenues of $3.8 billion and EBITDA of $278 million.  The company's profit margin is 1.9%.  It pays no dividend on the more than 28 million shares outstanding.  Given the fact that the employees of the company are contract laborers and the shareholders of the company are the ones who have risked their money to provide a product to the public that has been, until recently, wildly popular, why should the CEO now be required to give up his salary and work for free?  Furthermore, if the CEO is to be required to forfeit his salary, why should it go to the employees instead of the shareholders?  The answer, of course, is Gary's envy demands it.
Gary is much holier than I am because he thinks about the little guy all of the time.  It drives him to madness that line workers at Chipotle are only making $25,000 year when the CEO of the company is making $10 million.  I many times has Gary, when he used to go to Chipotle, voluntarily given some of his money to the line workers as a bonus for their service to him?  In other words, does Gary put his money where his mouth is or is he simply another loud-mouthed, envy filled hater of the free market?  I suspect the latter.
Chipotle, like all profit seeking corporations, is not organized to be a "responsible neighborhood employer."  Entrepreneurs risk their own money to serve the public by providing them goods and services they hope the public will buy at a price they can afford.  Employees are a fungible quantity and ultimately nothing more than an additional factor in the cost of doing business.  Chipotle serves millions of customers and should not be required to pay its employees one red cent more than the free market will bear for their labor services.  It is the customer who reigns supreme in the free market, not the employees who work for the company.  I many jobs has Gary created in his neighborhood?  Do you think he has been a responsible neighborhood employer?  Chipotle has created 60,000 jobs.  How many has Gary created?  My guess is that Gary has never created a single job in his entire life.  Ah yes, Christmas time is a wonderful time to express your envy and display your hypocrisy, isn't it?

Monday, December 19, 2016

The Evil Empire's Nasty Plan For World Domination

In honor of the current Star Wars movie, I present to you a real world example of a true evil empire and its designs upon  world domination.  You must go to the following link and watch the seven minute clip found there before reading any of the commentary that follows.  Here is the link.
(If the link does not work, go here:
Thanks to Gary North for providing the above link.  As North wrote about it, "things can be hidden in plain sight."  This startling speech excerpt, available for all the world to see on YouTube, was delivered in 2007 and contains a complete summary of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika's plans for the expansion of the Amerikan Empire around the world.  Please go watch the link now.

The speaker is not some leftist liberal or some rightist conspiracy theorist.  He is, "Gen. Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO."  The gist of his speech is that the military forces of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika have been and will be used to attack "seven countries in five years" in order to capitalize upon the demise of the Soviet Union by expanding the Empire throughout the Middle East while the Russians are down. If you read some of North's commentary you will note that he adroitly points out that the plan has now backfired.  Syria was next on the plan for destruction, after destroying Iraq and Afghanistan, but the Russians, under Putin, rose up and became strong enough to thwart SDA plans in Syria just within the last year.  It does not take a genius to realize that the current anti-Russian propaganda streaming out of the military-industrial complex is a response to this reality.  It also does not take a genius to realize that King Donnie is a major obstacle in the way of the hawkish Neo-cons who still want to dominate the world.
The SDA warmongers desperately wanted to unseat President Assad and they were willing to sacrifice the innocent lives of a half million Syrian citizens to accomplish their goal.  The SDA did manage to murder a half million innocent Syrians but failed in its goal of taking over Syria, thanks entirely to the presence of a strong Russia under Putin.  Assad remains in power and the SDA is highly unlikely to engage in any military attacks in Syria now that Russia is strong enough to fight back.  It is not the Amerikan way to fight people strong enough to fight back.  No, the Amerikan way is to occupy and rule countries that are defenseless in the eyes of the Empire.
How would you, as a citizen of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika, feel if a powerful foreign government sent its military into your country in an attempt to overthrow your current King?  How mad would you become if that foreign military was responsible for the murder of a half million SDA citizens?  Would that make you angry enough to engage in a guerilla war against that occupying force?  If you said yes, you have now met the definition of a terrorist in the eyes of the SDA power brokers.  I realize you believe that you are a patriot for defending your country from a foreign occupying force but that is not the way the SDA defines a patriot. The SDA definition of a patriot is anyone who worships and adores the SDA military.
What is the constitutional basis for the Amerikan Empire? What is the moral basis for an offensive war against nations which have no intention or ability to attack the SDA?  Why are the taxpayers being legally required to finance these immoral wars of empire expansion?  Why are the soldiers who prosecute these immoral wars of empire building not charged with murder when they kill innocent foreigners who posed no threat to SDA security?  On the contrary, why are those same soldiers praised as heroes for their immoral acts of war against stinkin' foreigners around the world?  I know they all deserve to die for refusing to bow down before the Empire but please help me to understand....when did the American way become the way of Empire?  Who stole my country?  Is there any hope I can ever get it back?  I think not.