the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Another Day

Posted by Jeff Id on November 10, 2016

So the election went well for America.   For those who live outside of the  US, you won’t understand just how much regulation the largest government on the planet can inflict, nor will it be easily understood just how much tax is being paid by business.  There is a reason manufacturing has left the US in droves.   I haven’t looked up historic records of such things, but the loss of American manufacturing capability has to be the single greatest migration of business in human history.  Again, bulk math drives the situation.  When a situation creates pressure for action the people or businesses respond to those pressures in kind.   If the costs and regulations are higher in one area than another, like gas law, the business will flow from high pressure to low at a non-zero rate only slowed by the frictions caused by such movement.

And flow it has.  From America to the rest of the world.  To business friendly countries like China, Tiawan and now even VietNam.  Countries with leaders who understand math outweighs feelings and oddly enough – Capitalism.   These are people who understand that personal spaces and micro-agression are foolish in their very concept.  They laugh at us – literally! These are folks who get that a building is very unlikely to really harm the planet and far more likely to provide a service to the population.   They know that global warming is not a real threat but is an excellent economic business relocating pressure to use in against people who think it is.  You know, common sense things like that which America’s liberals generally fail to understand.

Despite this flow of business away from America, and in fact completely without regard for said flow, American liberals actively wish to destroy business.  The young generation has been taught that all business is greed and greed is a greater evil than not eating.  See we live in a country where people aren’t starving, they have grown up without even the hint of a day without food.  They live in cities and eat food transported to them from all over the world.  They go to schools where indoctrination and acceptance of liberal belief is primary, feelings are a close second and math and science drop way down the list as useful things to understand.  The acceptance of illogic is foundational to modern American liberalism.   Fakenomics, global warming doom, cow farting is destroying the planet for gods sake, are part and parcel of the system they unwittingly serve.

I’m extremely disappointed with the protests in the cities to Trumps election.   While it was often quoted by the fake media that Clinton’s supporters were more educated than Trump, what was nearly unreported was that Trump even won the now known to be inaccurate polling results among people who made more than 30,000 per year.  I personally define this group as functional people.  The protesters in the cities were obviously a young crowd, and were apparently really focused on Trump racism – because the media here spends much of its time telling people that republicans and conservatives are racist.  After the endless liberal media channels realized that all of their advertising for Clinton, all of their unpaid and unabashed  support for the democrats wasn’t enough to put a crook in office, that is when the lashing out began.   I heard them repeatedly discuss Republican anger and hate, it was the uneducated rural folk who voted, that their anger against the billionaires was the problem.  Never once in the first few hours following the election did they discuss that it was regulation, taxation, or of course the utter lack of common sense espoused by the current Democrat governance.  Certainly not the fact that Hillary was and is a face-palm obvious criminal.

Then there were the protests.  What was most disappointing to me about the protests was the fake claims of Trump racism, because I didn’t know of any examples.  I took a minute to search the internet for examples of racism that Trump has exhibited and quickly found the exact sort of illogical argument the liberals have been so well trained to accept with religious fervor.  From the Huffington post, an article titled – Here Are 13 Examples Of Donald Trump Being Racist.

  • Attacking muslim gold star parents.
    • Muslim is not a race, it is a religion.   The argument with them was an avoidable situation but it certainly cannot be characterized as racist. It is an unhealthy religion too but in today’s liberal-think I’m not allowed to have that opinion but as a sexist republican, I cannot accept a religion which treats women so badly and by its own tenants doesn’t allow them the choice to exit. I also recognize it as an authoritarian government structure rather than a religion. — But again, whether you can figure that out or not, it is not racism to have an argument with a Muslim.
  • He claimed a judge was biased because he was a Mexican
    • So, while making policy which is clearly against Mexico, it is racist to even argue that a Judge from that region might be biased?   I think even the slightest bit of common sense says otherwise.  Oh, and Mexico is a country, not a race so again the argument defies logic.
  • The justice department sued his company twice for housing discrimination.
    • Lawsuits are not racism.  They cannot be by definition.   In business, you get sued, you go to court, you have problems with all kinds of people, you are a continual target for the Federal government.  We don’t know the details of these suits and neither does the post.  Did Trump do something racist in 1972, maybe, but calling the lawsuit an example of racisim is completely bogus.

The article goes on and on with completely nonsensical claims, he didn’t hire ‘mostly minorities’ in one casino, the very definition of minority means less of them. The gave an example of one person who apparently made outrageous claims which the post didn’t even attempt to verify – even with a second opinion.  Trump didn’t disown David Duke quickly enough for them, Trump didn’t use the right politically correct language, he accused a Bridgeport casino of being run by non-Indians mafia types, on and on but outside of the unsubstantiated outrageous claims by some guy who was clearly not a Trump supporter and for all we know doesn’t even exist, they had no actual examples of racisim.

One of the points the article attempted was the condoning of the beating of a black lives matter protester.  Remember the apologies by the political left when they said ‘All Lives Matter’ and the backlash from the African community?  Boy I do.  And the backlash when people say blue lives matter..  Well the Post displayed a short video with the claims that the protester was being kicked on the ground.  Since that time we have learned that the ‘protesters’ were being paid by the Democrat party to deliberately incite violence at these rallys.   A crime for sure, but again the left-wing press is nowhere to be found when that absolutely damning video and email evidence of CRIMINAL activity by the Democrat party was produced.  It is not racism to disagree with these people.

The problem with an objective reading of the Post article, is that none of the 13 examples are Trump racism.  The language is inflammatory which you can tell from the title.  It probably makes readers feel a certain way, but it logically is not racism.

In direct contrast, the liberal party of America is openly racist.  Black lives matter might have started with a good thought but it is nothing but an anti-white hate group which is more violent, more popular, and more numerous than the also=evil KKK itself.  The group is openly anti-white, openly anti-law and represents an evil sickness within the African community.  The KKK and Black lives matter are equal groups in all things racist.  Images and video of white people being beaten, abused and attacked for the sole crime of being white are quite common, and instead of rejecting the hate, liberals embrace it even inviting them to the white house because it is a popular movement. And because white people have pale skin.

The liberal party of America is also sexist.  The LGBT community leads the way in this with anti-marriage, anti-male rhetoric of the worst kind.  What is worse is that the worst of these groups are openly supported by the liberal media as a solution to a problem which largely doesn’t exist.  While decrying Hillary’s loss as sexism, the media openly campaigned for a Woman simply because she was female and a black man simply because he was black.  While you may agree that we need a woman in the White house, the very statement is sexist BY definition!  While a black man is in the white house, promoting him simply because he was black was 100% racist, and much of the liberal media did exactly that in both cases.  I was raised that all people are equal under the law, not that some are more equal than others and that IS how I chose to live my life.

Why isn’t the goal simply finding the best person with the best qualities is beyond me.  Like all of my friends, we don’t care one whit what color a persons skin is.  We don’t care what sort of hardware they hold in their pants.  I liked Fiorina (a woman) first and then Carson a very smart doctor who, if you give a crap about such things, also happened to have black skin. Contrast that with the liberals in power promoted a woman’s candidacy over any shred of common sense simply due to the SEX she represented.  They wanted to repeat the feat they performed with a black man, so the so-smart yet math-ignorant elitists in media, who would control rather than report, espoused the virtues of A CROOK in public for nearly two years.   Hillary Clinton is a liar, a cheat, a theif and would sell the United States of America at the drop of a hat — because she already has.  The media directly cheated the public to do so as well, handing Hillary debate questions (we will likely find out more about that in the future), coordinating with the DNC on what questions to ask Trump, actively colluding to destroy Sanders.  All of which they did while holding their heads aloof and pretending that it was simply reporting.  It is not only CNN which has this problem.

So my Trump voting “problem” these left-wing fools can’t understand, is NOT sexist, it is NOT racist, it is not anger against billionaires, it is not the desperation of a failing middle class individual that drives our decision, and nor is it some confused hillbilly in a pickup truck with two teeth and a dog —– it IS logic.  A skill that the left-wing schools in America have successfully removed from the curriculum’s of our universities and high schools.  How that particular bit isn’t obvious to the media, is as shocking to me as not being able to point out the sun on a clear day at noon.

So watching those young folk storm the streets in protest makes me sick to my stomach.  The evils they represent are completely unknown to them.  They are oblivious to the hunger and anguish which will be created by a collapsing economy under the pressures of an all powerful central government.  The lassez fair shoulder shrugs they give when  you talk about manufacturing leaving the country combined with the angry vitriol over climate change doom when one is in evidence and the other is not, are just another symptom of their immense ignorance.  I very much fear for America because while we might have a supreme court with a bit of common sense in the future, we simply cannot overcome that much stupid in the long term.   When a crook can garner that much of the vote, what hope do we have?  When people have their heads up their asses, literally protest and cry as that same crook is not put into the highest position of the country, how can any other form of logic be expected to form within their minds.

It cannot.

But for now I will relax a little while understanding the really good news; that our supreme courts eventual transformation into the extreme court, that increased tax rates on the highest taxed businesses in the world, and that increases in the endless draconian regulation of the US federal, state and local governments

…… won’t be happening today!!




Posted in Uncategorized | 31 Comments »

FIB says Clinton Not Guilty — Id’s Predicted November Surprise Comes True!!

Posted by Jeff Id on November 6, 2016

Just one post ago. Like Nostradamus.

Hell, I was having fun because for a short time the other day I couldn’t find a different angle as to why Comey would have the FBI working in shifts.  It seemed real enough to be crazy but so is everything else.  Despite the fact that he only had 30,000 emails before and it took months to come to conclusion, with 650,000 emails the FBI reviewed them in a few days.

Comey has decided that Hillary doesn’t deserve charges — better than a pardon and it just happens to have occurred with 2 days left.

hahaha.  My Id is smarter than the FBI.

The shortest investigation in history….AND SOON THE 100% COMPLETE EXONERATION OF CLINTON PER COMEY!

Watch the id..

Posted in Uncategorized | 19 Comments »

Bad Trump – Open Thread

Posted by Jeff Id on November 6, 2016

So She is a crook, an absolutely guilty criminal with behaviors beyond treasonous.  She has collected money from foreign governments, spent the money on her own family, she went from “broke” to a quarter billion in cash since her husband retired.  Clinton will be beholden to these foreign investors 100%.  Imagine if she doesn’t listen to Morocco, the KING will simply threaten to release her emails.  Quatar, Saudi’s, Egypt, Russia, on and on, it is so blatantly obvious, why people can’t figure that out, is beyond me.

In May, Petty Officer First Class Kristian Saucier plead guilty to and is currently serving a one year sentence in federal prison for violation of the Espionage Act, though no charge of espionage was ever filed. His crime, he used his cellphone to take 6 photographs while he was in a “classified area of a submarine,” the USS Alexandria.Fox News Insider.

She did so much more yet hasn’t been charged there are hundreds of examples of Saucier’s plight.  As an aside, Comey is complicit in this, he created it when he buckled to political pressure earlier this year and I don’t expect him to come through this time either.

Her husband is an accused rapist, molester and hasn’t changed course. She’s protected him and as a lawyer as an actual child rapist (she believed was guilty) so the argument that Trump is bad to women doesn’t make sense.  Make it here on this thread if you want.

My point is  — what about Trump.   I’ve heard people say how bad he is dozens of times yet they are completely non-specific.  What do people see that makes Trump anywhere near as bad as Clinton.

What I see is a man with a lack of detail.  I see someone who knows how to negotiate and it doesn’t start with — you are not paying for the wall — you must start with the extreme scenario and work your way to the middle.   Bomb them to hell!!!  etc..  Every position he has articulated comes from that perspective.  Most haven’t had the opportunity to negotiate anything serious that affects more than their own lives.  How are you supposed to act when facing something which affects jobs, the economy, safety etc… I get that he scares people but that is what negotiations do, they scare you into a better position for them.

It is interesting that we are so PC that our emotions have now taken precedent over actual acts.   Microagression is becoming a non-statute crime which has forced some from their educations.   They must conform or they lose (fill in random leverage based variable here). Where is the REQUIRED lack of confrontation going?

But beyond his inarticulateness, what I want to know is what people think is so bad about Trump that an absolute criminal is better!

I will answer questions only, when I have time.  Feel free to bash Trump to your hearts content.

Posted in Uncategorized | 14 Comments »

The November Surprise

Posted by Jeff Id on November 2, 2016

So each election for president in the last several cycles has include revelations by the liberal media that the conservative has done something bad— in the last 3 days.  Romney apparently hates dogs, Bush had a DUI etc…

You would think that they would bring this crap earlier but it isn’t as effective when a person can explain what actually happened.  I was expecting another rough Trump tape – nothing compared to William Clinton.  I was expecting some tax thing or whatever, what I wasn’t expecting was an immediate and unqualified exoneration from the FBI.

However, I just learned that the FBI has “chosen” people working in shifts to look through these NEW emails.

IMO, it, that, zhe, she, whatever, will be exonerated falsely again before Tuesday next week.    Comey is still clean in that case and Clinton gets the final push.

Why else would the FBI work in shifts?


Posted in Uncategorized | 19 Comments »

Donna Brazile’s Lies Continue… Clinton Corruption Also Continues

Posted by Jeff Id on October 31, 2016

It seems obvious that the data the FBI has from Weiner and Huma is absolutely damning.  Comey had to come out with it now or he would be culpable.  Otherwise he could just duck the issue until later.  It was already obvious and were WikiLeaks not releasing details behind the scenes, we wouldn’t have enough data to know how corrupt Hillary is and how corrupt the Democrat party is.

On that issue, I fully beleived that in the first debate Hillary was passed the question about cybersecurity.  She was too quick on the answer and her answer fit the question too perfectly considering the major criminal issues she faces already.   I literally cringed that the moderator asked something so biased in Hillary’s favor but it was the tailoring of the response that made me duck.

Then we had Democratic National Committee boss and former CNN contributor Donna Brazile’s name come out in the Wiki releases stating that she shared the questions.  She denied it 100%, then we learned that the checksum for the email was perfect so we know Donna is a liar!!  She made no comment but today, we find out that she did it another time and actually offered additional questions in the future.  Her email is here where she replies that she will send more along with the death penalty question already discussed.

Hillary’s group could have denied the questions being offered.  They could have responded that it wasn’t fair to the other candidates.  Hill is in on this one too, not just crazy Donna.  CNN is also guilty because they were intentionally sharing questions with what we know was their favorite candidate.  I for one am certain that this behavior continued throughout the debate cycle — at least until Fox.

The renewed FBI investigation couldn’t happen to a nicer person.   If she gets elected, we could go right into an actual constitutional crisis but that doesn’t stop the nut-jobs I heard on the radio claiming that climate change was so dangerous we HAVE to vote for a crook.    They literally claimed that climate change was more important than criminality of the candidate.

Love it!




Posted in Uncategorized | 8 Comments »


Posted by Jeff Id on October 28, 2016

So yeah…  I wrote in no uncertain terms that Hillary was a crook.  I wrote that Mann was a crook. I wrote that Lewandowski is a liar and crook.   I wrote that tree ring hockey sticks are nonsense. Yes I know it doesn’t make me Nostradamaus because — those of you born with common sense already saw the same thing. I do get points becaue I took the time to drive a stake in the ground and wrote it down.  Had I been wrong, I would be called out on it.

I also titled the last post in the terms that “SHE” was getting away with it……

So I will give you some additional common sense from the matter, because we are being led by the nose BY the media.  I’m unwilling to participate in the nonsense.  Hillary is alreayd 100% guilty of crimes NONE of us could possibly survive prosecution from.  The evidence is in and she IS guilty.

She is in fact— so effing guilty that the director of the FBI has re-opened investigation of her emails.

Comey, the same asshole who let her go just week ago despite the fact that she had her people DELETE subpoenaed evidence using server-wipe software, had preferential destruction of computer evidence IN A NOW RE-OPENED CASE!  The evidence has been wiped, her closest people protected by writ.

It’s nonsense to protect a heavily entrenched politician.


She was blatantly and illegally protected by those charged with following law.   Comey literally threw out a case so obviously and easily prosecutable that it was impossible to defend their rejection.  He literally stated that the problem existed, but he couldn’t show “intent”.    hehe. The mainstream media allowed it to happen with no critique.

SOO,  I keep being right folks.  I really do.  It is what we used to call— common sense.  Today it’s called ‘conservative’.

I’ll leave you with a quote from a comment here a couple of days ago.


Just to send a little cold air into this echo chamber of hot vented air — a few words from the best of the MSM: Read it and think!

So while I’m THINKING perhaps Sirioso, might want to re-think ZHE’s own position.

Read the link at your own risk.

Image result

Smarter, you will not be.

Posted in Uncategorized | 11 Comments »

Getting Away With It

Posted by Jeff Id on October 27, 2016

My bold below.  Clintons folk could even figure out why she did it.

From Fox News today and the department of – you couldn’t make this stuff up:


Podesta also wrote to Tanden airing his concerns on March 2, the day the story about Clinton’s private email account broke.

“Speaking of transparency, our friends [attorney David] Kendall, Cheryl and Phillipe [Reines] sure weren’t forthcoming on the facts here,” Podesta wrote.

Tanden replied, implying that keeping the email setup a secret was likely Mills’ doing.

“This is a Cheryl special,” Tanden wrote. “Know you love her, but this stuff is like her Achilles heel. Or kryptonite. She just can’t say no to this s—. Why didn’t they get this stuff out like 18 months ago? So crazy.”

Tanden added: “I guess I know the answer they wanted to get away with it.



Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments »

Donna Brazile on CheckSums

Posted by Jeff Id on October 24, 2016

Since the beginning of digital transmission, something I call checksums have been used.  We used to get them with downloads to correct EXE files before they were run and unexpectedly crashed. Today we use them to write to hard drives because 1 in 10^15 bytes is wrong or some crap like that, even when the drives are good, stuff goes wrong and checks are used to retry data transmission.  In the electrical engineering world, things aren’t perfect and a bad EE doesn’t recognize this, a good one spends her or his life looking out for the problems.

Transmission of 1’s or 0’s or whatever base is being used needs to accurately differentiate between states.  If you want to maximize your transmission rate, an absolute law of physics for return on investment of data transmission — is that you push it to its absolute limit of resolution.  And you then provide a checksum- for each packet of information transmitted.  The check could be very simple, add the digital value of each byte and transmit that.   Take the lowest order of the added value of each byte…  Sounds complex but it isn’t.  Take the highest order of each byte value – same result…. But Donna is a moron and that is what she gets.

The bottom line is that the checksum doesn’t contain the full information of the email and it is impossible to put together a readable combination of characters which would lead to the same checksum.  If you put a single extra space…..  An extra period… delete a character, change an apostrophe, let alone a changed idea,  the checksum doesn’t agree anymore.

So since nobody but Donna disagreed, Donna didn’t like her own emails. She was embarrassed by what she wrote!  Enough to lie about it, or all of the hacked email folk would have disagreed.

Pay attention folks, it’s just the data.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Media Corruption Impacts Election

Posted by Jeff Id on October 23, 2016

Update:  Reader Lynn Clark added this link to the comments– along with a fair critique of my post.   I rarely watch video to get information because it comes to slowly.   In this case, I watched the whole thing.  The title is stupid, the rest is not.


The media is more than stinking up the joint this election.  Even the pseudo-conservative Fox news has made it clear that they will not back a political outsider.  I seriously wonder how many people are aware that Hillary has been caught (smoking gun) trading American interests for her own personal gain.   Do voters even know that she sold 20 percent of Amercian Uranium directly to Russia in exchange for millions of dollars in contributions to her charity, the one she claimed contributed 90% of its money to good causes — a complete fabrication at the last debate which went largely unchallenged.  The media not only didn’t question her once during the entire campaign about this quid-pro-quo Uranium deal but didn’t even bring it up in the debates.   In addition to the millions, Bill Clinton was given another half million right after the deal for a ‘speaking’ engagement.  Instead of talking about Hillary helping to arm a totalitarian superpower in exchange for money for herself, they talk about Trump being unstable.

You probably don’t even know that Podesta owned huge amount of stock in a Russian business, only that Russia hacked the emails and Trump must be their friend.  Of course  you also don’t know that there is no actual evidence on public record that Russia had a thing to do with the hacked emails?

Do you even know that the Hillary campaign and the DNC have been caught red handed in video and documents using illegal aliens to vote in multiple states to RIG the election?   The media has only brushed this point but long time activists with strong contacts to the white house have been forced to resign.   All that people could ask about the incident, and all that was news, was to ask Trump if he would support the election results.  No mention made of WHY the results would be questioned by anyone.  No reporting of the seriousness of the wide spread allegations and video evidence of election tampering by the Democrat party.  It’s as though discussion of such things is a Lewandowsky-like conspiracy, BUT WE HAVE IT ON TAPE!!  It isn’t a stretch to imagine why they would ask the question and then act like Trump is crazy when he doesn’t give in to their stupid reaction.   It was a scam folks and it worked because you probably don’t even know about what caused it.

Are you aware that there are literally dozens of quid pro quo examples released in the Wiki emails, including the use of the actual words by Clinton’s own confidants in reference to foreign and other money.  This is the biggest story of corruption in the history of America, and the media only wants to talk about women Trump is accused of — well I’m not sure how to describe it.  Did you hear that the King of Morocco spent 12 million for access to Hillary. Did you hear when the media asked her what the King expected to receive in return for that cash payment? — No you didn’t, because they didn’t ask!

You may say the latest porn star sex accuser is fair game, but are you even aware that Bill Clinton has been accused of rape and Hillary accused of threatening her to silence.  Did you know that a new women came forward and accused Bill of forcibly using the back of her head as a rubbing post.  The detail she used was completely disgusting and I couldn’t finish the video, but the MEDIA won’t report it.  Actual rape and actual assault, while the accuser actually pleaded with him to stop which he did NOT do.   Instead we have BOLD HEADLINES that a porn star was offered money for sex with Trump and she said no.   A claim Trump denies of course, but the two events are orders of magnitude different from a moral perspective.

Did you know that Clinton attempted to give the FBI significant support that they wanted in important positions, in exchange for changing the ‘classified’ status of a critical email right at the time she was telling the public that there WERE NO CLASSIFIED emails.

Do you even understand that the REASON for the private server was to hide the quid pro quo Hillary was working as Secretary of State, from the public eye and government control.   Without a private server, her crimes would be totally visible.  That is what the scandal is about, it had little to do with protecting confidential information — as the media keeps telling you. Hell, conservatives were talking about the reason for the servers existence well before the ‘classified email’ problem was discussed.  It’s like climategate, they got the public focused on the wrong issue entirely avoiding the real problem.  That is the purpose of controlling information, but it is impossibly hard for the general public to figure out these things if the MEDIA won’t report them.

Did anyone even tell you that the Podesta emails were not disclosed to the FBI for the investigation.  These were held back by Hillary, even though they were highly related to classified emails as they included discussion with the FBI about classified emails.   Yes this means that the FBI had emails in their possession which proved Hillary did not comply with their discovery order.  Instead, these same emails were instead deleted and scrubbed from her server using Bit Bleach, a program which overwrites the same area of the harddrive until the data cannot be forensically recovered.   How would you know if ABC,CBS,CNN, NBC and even Fox don’t report it as part of their normal news.  There was 10X more evidence of Hillary quid pro quo in Podesta’s emails sent to Hillary’s server.  YOU and I should have no doubt as to why she destroyed the other 30,000.

Even the fact that she deleted emails protected under subpoena was lied about.  The podesta emails have recently proven that she was completely guilty of the charges and the coverup and the content of the emails demonstrates the INTENT in their destruction.  She HAD previously claimed her lawyers only deleted personal emails, but we only have seen a section of the Podesta thread which proves that she was bribing the FBI to remove classified emails while simultaneously lying to them about the emails existence, and at the same point in time her team was actively deleting  incriminating emails.   Did you know any of that?

Were you aware that the FBI gave immunity to the key people involved in the quid pro quo scam.  The one in front of them that they were NOT investigating, instead focusing on the obviously mishandled classified emails.   That’s not the half of it though, they actually agreed to DESTROY THE COMPUTERS of the people who had been given immunity.   I know CNN didn’t bother to report any of that.  Why would the FBI agree to destroy the evidence of what we now KNOW for an absolute FACT from the Podesta email release was felony level criminal activity by these people.  What power and money were they offered in exchange for the destruction of those computers.

And the media didn’t report that either.   In fact the only way to find these things out is search the internet endlessly and piece the bits together.  A bit of talk radio doesn’t hurt either.

Did you know that the majority if not all of the contributions from the Clinton foundation have been to her husband’s other foundations as well as to grease palms of people allegedly helping other countries.   This hundreds of millions of dollars is not for Charity — instead we get news of a Trump foundation exceeding a paltry 25,000 limit and not filing correctly in New York.  Well done MEDIA, well done indeed!  The two issues are again, not comparable in magnitude or criminality but you probably heard about Trump, did you hear about what Clinton really did?!!

Have you understood that the Democratic party is funding violence at Trump rallies such that the media can paint Trump as violent.   Did you know that was Clintons intent when she spoke of the violence during her campaign and the media was instructed to pile on?  It was a setup that some of us believed, but now we have video and written proof.   The individuals were literally paid and trained to go to these events and try to get in fights.   They were also paid to incite violence at the anti-police demonstrations.  People are being injured and even killed and the Democrats are caught red handed on video funding and training people to make the situation worse.  That has to be a felony of some sort, but you sure don’t hear of it from CNN do you..?

Are you aware that the media has been caught red handed organizing, approving and delivering scripted messages for the Hillary campaign for this entire election cycle.  Smoking gun, red handed crooked collusion, just like climategate, — which incidentally they also did a horrible job covering and most people aren’t aware of that event either.  Her fits of rage with them when they ask her questions she didn’t like.  Did you know she was fed questions before the democratic debates by CNN?   Before proof of that became public, I watched the first presidential debate between her and Trump and my friends will tell you I fully believed Clinton was fed the cyber security question which quite transparently avoided the FBI investigation of her now proven CRIMINAL activities.

These emails, videos and other evidence have proven beyond a doubt how corrupt Clinton and the Democrat party are.  No I’m sure that the Republicans do some bad things but we all know there is no equivalent on the other side of the fence.  In fact, you can tell which Republicans like power more than doing the right thing, because they know all of these facts SO they are likely the ones attacking Trump as well.   In the greatest magnitude, one party owns this mess, the authoritarian faux-Democrat, vote-stealing party is following the exact pattern that the conservatives have warned you of for decades.  They are stealing your votes, they are stealing your money and property, they are giving away your children’s future, and you know damned well, once you’ve given you aren’t getting it back from Hillary.  If you can’t figure her personality out from her other actions, you can tell that by how her ‘foundation’ gives back alone.

So do you know what I think when I see people supporting Hillary, I think they are morons.  I think that in many cases, their ideals of government have corrupted their own thought processes to the point that they cannot see truth.  I also see tremendous ignorance of what is going on due to concerted efforts by liberal media groups.   I’m afraid of what it means for America to support this evil person, and the evil totalitarian organization she represents.

The government-media complex has grown the critical mass the founding fathers warned you of.   Mind control is completely unnecessary when you have full complicity and collusion of the media.   There are very big stories in this election that are not being covered, and very small stories being painted as big events.  America is being attacked on all fronts, the elections are being rigged, non-citizen undocumented voters are being allowed to vote with only a drivers license, video and written evidence has shown that they are being funded by the Democratic party to provide fake jobs, transportation and registration to vote in multiple states – with full knowledge of the Clintons and whitehouse.

Again, I know I’m not changing anyone’s vote, but you at least owe it to yourselves to be informed by something other than the canned bullshit being peddled by the networks.   Try Breitbart for a start but there are a lot of other sources as well.  Today we learn that Trumps latest accuser — a porn star mentioned above — is launching her new on line sex company at the same moment she accused Trump of an unverifiable claim that she was offered money for sex with Trump by a third party.  Free advertising?  Noooo!, couldn’t be true.  She claims she said no and instead got money for sex with other people.  I bet you won’t learn about the timing related to her company on other networks though, only the big HEADLINE of the accusation.  You have to come to an old climate blog to even find out about it.  Where was the headline for Clinton’s use the back of an unwilling woman’s head as an orgasm post.

Did you know that several of the Trump accusers accounts have been rejected by witnesses?   Probably not because MSNBC doesn’t want to tell you about that.

I’m not buying any of the bullshit from the networks, and I am buying that Bill Clinton did assault the woman on the tape recently because her story was disgustingly detailed, and unlike Trump, Clinton has a history of rape and sexual assault (dramatically immoral) and unlike Trump, Clinton has been forced to pay hundreds of thousands to get out of trouble with women.   See — not the same thing at all!! and NBC doesn’t even talk about it, only accusations of Trump chasing ladies are news.

All of that, and I’m still not a huge Trump fan.   He will negotiate a better deal for the US and you cannot buy him with a few million bucks because he flatly doesn’t need it.  He lacks detail and doesn’t communicate well.  Still, the prospect of an outsider in the job is one which I am very much interested in at this point.  These corrupt bastards in the FBI and all across our government need to be purged with extreme prejudice.   We could probably kick out all of the drug addicts from our jails and refill the whole things up again with Washington insiders and be a hell of a lot better off.

Pay attention folks, because you are about to get horrifically screwed by the media and the Clintons.   Juanita Broaddrick can tell you personally from her own experience that it’s not fun to be forcibly screwed by either of them and she was by both.


Posted in Uncategorized | 10 Comments »

Selection 2016

Posted by Jeff Id on October 17, 2016

So the Air Vent has been radio silent for a long time.   This blog was born during the first Obama election.   My very first article was to point out the Russian reaction to missile defense in Poland had nothing to do with the actual missiles but rather the range of the insanely powerful radar system on their border.  I was proven right over time.

I spent most of the blogs formative years on climate change.  Climate Audit, WUWT and the Blackboard blogs were key drivers in my writings.   I am extremely grateful for those blog owners direction and trust.   This blog grew steadily for years until Climategate broke in 2009 with the Air Vent at ground zero.  I was at about 5000 views per day and when that hit, it jumped to 35,000.  Probably a normal day at WUWT but it dwarfed my hometown newspapers views at the time.

Today we are faced with a new election and I have to say, an easier choice has never been possible.  We have one candidate who is inarticulate, a billionaire, no criminal history, no known acceptance of foreign money for political favors,  no driving record problems, a non-drinker, didn’t want the Iraq war, and is not part of the political class.  We have a second candidate who is known to take money from foreign countries for undisclosed reasons, who has dealt in classified information on unsecured computer systems, who is known to have attempted quid-pro-quo negotiations with the FBI to change classification of emails, who has attacked the women her husband has been involved with, while vigorously prosecuting her husband’s victims, who has disallowed help to Americans in life ENDING situations ” ‘what at this point does it matter’ “, who has taken millions in speech money from every world-class business,  who has been protected by a compliant media, who was fed debate questions from CNN, who was given a pass from the FBI through obviously corrupt governmental agencies for uniquely poor handling of government documents-which was being done for the reasons of HIDING THE OPERATIONS of HER TAX FREE fake “non-profit” organization which happens to be set up in a manner in which the FOREIGN donors are not disclosed to the US tax payers.

See, the scam is easy, you set up a non-profit in Canada which at this point has not been required to disclose its donors to public, and then you set up a non-profit in the US who is required to show its donors – who are the Clinton group.  What is she going to ‘give’ for the money.   Why are these also rich people, willing to cough up millions?  The answer is as obvious as the response, the Clinton foundation stated that they will stop taking foreign money AFTER she is elected.  In other words, if you want access—– Pay now!

I can’t wright enough to cover her sins.  My fingers will fall off.  She is as guilty as Mann.  She makes hide-the-decline look like girl scout cookie price inflation!!

None of these people are perfect, none of them are my choice.  I liked Fiorina and Carson, yes I am an evil Conservative — because I do understand business and those of you who aren’t…. don’t.  It’s not my fault that you haven’t handled US taxes.  When you wonder where manufacturing went, I told you already so it is your fault for thinking you understand it better than me.

Other countries citizens are exempt from my critique because you cannot understand what we face.  For the rest of you, if you were paying those taxes, you would likely understand the damage to our economy and likely change your mind.

Especially the readers of this blog.

Trump is inarticulate, which doesn’t work well for conservatives.   Bush was quite articulate, despite his gaffes, in case you don’t recall.   He was easy to tease for the left media but much sharper than he was ever given credit for – by the left.  I doubt any of my normal readers could handle the rigors of the daily microphone as well as he.  I couldn’t.  I was one of the few conservatives in my circle who didn’t like the 2nd Iraq war.  I din’t want it, but as is often the case, Nobody asked me.   — I don’t feel sorry for them though.  War is evil, but so is extreme Muslim.  Yup, it is – sorry Brandon.   But that lack of quality Trumpian prose is an easy to slam problem.

So today, we have an incredibly successful businessman, being played by the media as an apparent accidental idiot billionaire.  He speaks of lower taxes, reduced regulation, proper energy production, WINNING DEALS with other countries, directing, controlling and TEACHING the world what it means to be free.   It sounds like cheer-leading, but I’m not there.  Fiorina is much better, but Trump will win the stupid deals because with the right leader, we hold the cards.   Unfortunately, he is in competition with a blatantly corrupt politician being bought out at every possible corner.  Even the RINO’s like her over the un-buyable Trump.  Money from every country for her campaign.  Even Iran.   Even UAE.  Muslim Brotherhood.  Hell the communist party of the united states has endorsed the monster over their own.

Ask yourself why Iraq, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Libya, the United Arab Emirates or Libya would pay money to the Clinton campaign?  Why would any foreign government be allowed whatsoever. What do they want in return.   It USED to be a crime.  Apparently it is all good when you are  a liberal.   Imagine the uproar if roles were reversed.

Tough call?

You will vote as you do no matter what I write.   I know that.  We don’t get the choice for what we actually want in a candidate, but I have to say that this is literally the easiest election decision I’ve ever made.


Posted in Uncategorized | 35 Comments »

Tax Thought Inversion

Posted by Jeff Id on August 8, 2016

So here is another example of wrongthink so actively promoted by the inappropriately self-titled ‘progressives’.

Advocates cite health benefits in pushing the proposals. “The goal of taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages is to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, which science has proven to be directly correlated to detrimental health impacts such as diabetes, obesity and heart diseases,” San Francisco Board of Supervisors member Malia Cohen told — source

Clearly this statement is accurate.  If we tax something, we increase its cost and across a broad spectrum of personal economic decisions, reduce the likelihood of its consumption.  The tiny tax also primarily reduces its availability to the most impoverished section of the public rather than equally distributing the reductions in consumption but that is also a progressive talking point.

Let’s see this other concept though:

Indeed, Clinton’s proposals call for $2.2 trillion in new spending over a 10-year period, with plans that would allow in about a million more immigrants a year. She’s looking to boost spending on infrastructure and education, as well as providing paid family and medical leave, increasing the minimum wage, and investing in economic development and research.

To pay for her proposals, she’s calling for a near-equal amount of taxation, with the burden placed primarily on the shoulders of corporations and those making more than $300,000 a year. Clinton’s plans rely primarily on Keynesian demand-side solutions, while Trumps’ are more focused on supply-side tax cuts. — from the ever-left CNBC

And Moody’s, using economist Mark Zandi decided that somehow leveling a 2.2 trillion dollar new CORPORATE tax would create more JOBS!  YES, if we take the company money, they will invest more money for more employees! See!!   If stupid capitalist CEO monkey has less money for bannanas, he will buy more bannanas! But if citizen monkey has less money for soda, he will buy less soda………  It doesn’t make sense even on a 4th grade level.  Increase business tax on the highest taxed country in the world means less business for that country… Easy!  The only way I see this econoschill coming up with these conclusions is a lot like Michael Mann, Zandi has tweaked parameters with a high economic feedback rate that grows corporate prosperity by unrealistic and probably non-linear amounts —- like climate science this is for a purpose folks.  Pay attention here.

Our business hasn’t even finished experiencing the full increases from Obama tax hikes -because they were delayed until after the election and now they want more!!!

Zandi had already contributed the maximum allowed amount to Hillaries primary campaign by one report.  On another topic, Hillary has also received 40 million from the severely undertaxed hedge-fund managers who’s personal profit is massive, yet they are taxed at capital gains which is well under half the true rate of manufacturing in this country.  One of the biggest left-wing talking points is hedge fund managers paying capital gains on their own income.  This subject is an absolute easy call for either party which should have been fixed decades ago but they continue to rake in the dough because they contribute to buyable crooked politicians -like Hillary.   Ever wonder why we have fund managers doing well and manufacturing going away?

Taxes folks, we have the highest business tax in the world.  Why should I keep jobs here if the taxation rates are so high.  Why not ship them to where we make more money?

Another example of inverted thought is that Hillary will punish corporations for ‘inversion’, or sending work overseas.  She and the rest of her ilk know we are overtaxed and that we would succeed more in another country.  It is EXTREMELY expensive to relocate a company to another country, especially in personnel, so the payback in taxes is obviously very large.  Yet companies in the US are investing in that exact move! We in the US are so overtaxed, that businesses are intentionally leaving to other countries, shouldn’t we look more closely at the ‘tax rate’?  Or should we just add another punishment tax for a US company trying to remain competitive in the world?   Yet the public is so ignorant of economics, they can’t parse the obvious.  For the US to be globally competitive, we need lower tax rates and less regulation, not more.

This is common sense folks, and it ain’t rocket science.  Zandi is an insider shill and he is selling an ass-over-head economic model to get Hillary elected, IMO likely for some form of personal benefit of which I have no idea.  The US manufacturing sector has continued to wilt under the massive limitation based policies of the last 20 years.   Just as you were told it would.

Let’s keep it simple though.   We all want opportunity for people.  I see these personal business numbers on a daily basis, I know them, I understand them.   I understand what yet another 2% or 5% tax increase does to available cash and investment and it is not pretty.  I understand what a 10% percent reduction does as well, and I have to tell you that we would be working very hard to keep employees with a 10% reduction in total income tax percentage because everyone would be investing violently in growth — that would drive wages up very strongly.

If you want new jobs, a massive removal of money from the corporate bank accounts is not rational on any level.  Don’t let others steal the bananas if you want some for yourself.  BUT—-if you actually want less jobs, you should tax the people who create jobs more.

Simple —-see. Easy call.



Posted in Uncategorized | 20 Comments »

Obama Wins the Prize or Political Climate Change — Recession Baby!

Posted by Jeff Id on August 4, 2016

Well folks, we have started a new recession.   It look pretty deep this time, rather like 2008.  Maybe not though as reductions in gas price will moderate the problem but it isn’t looking pretty.  Very fast decline in production across a wide variety of markets.

What Id?  Have you lost your mind….   CNN didn’t report that.  Is this another Lewandowsky paper setup?

Well, turns out I don’t need CNN or MSNBC to know what is going on with the economy.   I have another way.  I have the advantage of owning a large enough company which is well distributed across America which provides me the truly awesome opportunity to talk to other businesses leaders.

It could still turn around in which case I will post a different story — god I hope to write that one next week…  but I waited for over a month prior to posting and it does not look good. More to come from our crack network news outlets — after the election of course and then we will have — BREAKING NEWS!!!!

So if you want less cigarettes — tax the hell out of em!  — everyone gets that — totally makes sense.

If you want less guns — tax them to bejesus!  — got that too.

If you want less soda pop — tax it — everyone knows that!

We have the highest business tax in the world and it is primarily taxed at a personal income tax rate.    Yet we mouth the words “we want more jobs” while at the same time support even higher taxes – for business owners.

It is the height of ignorance to be angry at business when jobs move overseas.

It is the height of stupidity to expect them to stay.

Like it or not, Liberals and RINO’s own this one.  They will blame the election, others who are actually producers will recognize that the instability of the business environment in a financially stressed economy is the real issue.



Posted in Uncategorized | 30 Comments »

Climate Science Industry — Negotiation

Posted by Jeff Id on June 7, 2016

I don’t have much time as the company continues to grow.  This article is about the fact that the field called Climate Science has changed in a manner which is not openly recognized by those who have not been immersed in the papers.  Global warming is real, but it is absolutely not dangerous.   It is not a problem, and there is no evidence that it will be anytime in the foreseeable future.  Yes I’m that tired of it, but there is an interesting aspect to the changes in the climate discussion.

I’m tired of the climate BLOG pedantary. That’s what the Sci3nc3 discussion has turned into.   It is hard to be concerned with the nonsensical details of too many government-funded climate doom papers.  I likely am not going to live long enough to see Gavin Schmidt et whomever to be internationally recognized as serial climate exaggerators, and were I to live for those several decades, the now overly obvious proof of such would not bring me greater happiness.  These morons will continue to scream at the top of their lungs no matter which observation proves their inaccuracy or more succinctly — confederation.  ——Queue international conspiracy paper in a psychology journal…

The world of business is far quicker to resolution and it picks winners with rather colder equations than present day government science.  Business is far from easy, despite the popular imagination.  It’s the modern idea that business is something given rather than earned.  That it is friends or gifts or whatever that makes sales, profit margins or results.  Nothing could be farther from the truth, but the concept that our “Bernie” might potentially be someone who could run something as grandiose as a hotdog stand, is beyond reason.  Not that it matters what I write, after all, liberals know that I’m no Bernie.

I’m trying to be interested as to whether north pole sea ice will re-continue to melt, or whether the atmosphere will show enough warming for any reasonable person to see it as a problem.   It is really a hard sell in comparison to things like the economy, which actually feed us, clothe us, warm us, heal us, etc.. (well used to heal us, now it is the government)  Our public has decided to shut down a huge fraction of our power grid this summer in the US.  Maybe not enough to see brownouts, but quite possibly enough.  We shall see.  Certainly if warmists are right, we have SIMULTENEOUS unprecedented AIR-CONDITIONING doom!, but again —- whatever.  I’m going to buy 4 generators that burn coal, wood or dung in them 24/7 so that I can remain comfortable.

Then there are the Losers in their loser suits, telling us how to be more like them, and using their lawsuits to make it happen.  All in the name of freedom.   Sounds incredibly familiar and is a hallmark distinguishing attribute of deployed socialism, although it is most often discussed in opposite terms.

Our company is constructing a new building and I’m not sure that it is a good idea before the election.   It is a tiny thing though, not even a few acres, but I learned last week that we are NOT allowed to use Light Switches, we must use motion sensors.  It’s a good thing I’m not a lighting expert who built energy efficient lighting or I would explain to the morons with the laws how little difference that their ordinances make or how inconvenient we find them but again, we should bow to the Schmidt’s and Mann’s of the world who hold the true knowledge.

Doom and disaster of the sandwich board folk aside, I simply don’t have any excitement about our atmosphere.  Still love a good storm.  Still enjoy the SAME weather I had as a kid, despite the imaginations of the new generation of emotionally educated Illuminati.  It would actually be nice to have an interesting bit of science to bite on but “cover up the model problem” seems to be the idea in climate science these days.  Meh..  It simply isn’t interesting to be continually arguing with climatologists when the side you are arguing against is nothing but paid shills.

Well, unfortunately for me, I’m an engineer and an entrepreneur and I suppose even a reluctant businessman.  In other words, pure evil, or for the more pragmatic, a producer of services.  One thing I recognize in this world is a negotiation, and these people are not scientists at this point, on the whole they don’t really understand yet that they are not scientists anymore, but in a transition phase.  They have entered a pre-negotiated settlement between models and observation.

This is not a scientific negotiation.

Some in the climate science industry have understood.  Some are in the process of reducing model trends, and increasing observed temperature trends. All the while emphasizing uncertainty.  In climate science, and often in business, uncertainty is the moderating unknown factor.   Uncertainty is the heralded helper.  The cover for incoming reason and the industries only remaining protection from common sense. Barrages of questions as to why the ice caps have not melted, and extreme weather has not increased have only uncertainty as an answer.  Yet the pragmatic among us must realize that after decades of extreme doom climate science, we have been surprisingly left ONLY with — uncertainty.

This is a business transaction, and their side has the money, the power, the influence.  The skeptics have the science which is not an insignificant card.

Keep in mind, in business, the middle ground has nothing to do with the correct ground.  It has to do with value and result, and eventual cash in the negotiating players pockets.

We just have to be smart enough to recognize when the negotiations begin.  They are coming whether either side likes it or not.  What is worse is that no matter the outcome, the lawyers will without doubt win this transaction. The governments of the world literally cannot lose — they can only gain more or less.  The tobacco industry has proven quite well how hard it is to kill a multi-hundred billion dollar industry and the negative effects of climate science industry are far less personal.








Posted in Uncategorized | 30 Comments »

Nearly Two Teams of Hockey Sticks used in Massive Wilson Super Reconstruction

Posted by Jeff Id on January 16, 2016

So a Willis Eschenbach article at WUWT caught my attention this afternoon and cost me several hours. It is basically an average of 54 different tree ring reconstructions around the world. The sheer volume of data which went into each hockey stick and then was processed into the final hockeystick is huge.  Willis demonstrated the indescribable method used to combine the data turned out to be equivalent to a simple average. The result: Hockeystick!


Graph per Willis Eschenbach — WUWT article linked above

Last millennium northern hemisphere summer temperatures from tree rings:
Rob Wilson a, b, *, Kevin Anchukaitis b, c, Keith R. Briffa d, Ulf Büntgen e, g, h, Edward Cook b,
Rosanne D’Arrigo b, Nicole Davi b, i, Jan Esper j, Dave Frank e, Bj€orn Gunnarson k,
Gabi Hegerl l, Samuli Helama m, Stefan Klesse e, Paul J. Krusic f, k, Hans W. Linderholm n,
Vladimir Myglan o, Timothy J. Osborn d, Milos Rydval a, p, Lea Schneider j,
Andrew Schurer l, Greg Wiles b, q, Peng Zhang n, Eduardo Zorita

The data and articles are fully available on line here.

So knowing just enough about dendrochronology to actually produce work equal to those in publication, I must be an expert dendroclimatologist! Collect tree ring data, density, MXD, blue etc… Detrend by some random form of curve fit. Average or regress and compare to temp. If the comparison is not statistically significant, the bag of accepted statistical shenanigans is wide and nearly unbounded. You can correlate raw data with temp and discard data which isn’t strongly correlated. You can keep all data and use any number of multivariate regressions which functionally eliminate bad non-hockeystick data and amplify the “good”. You can use a huge variety of standardization curves and sorting criteria to create a hockey stick upslope at the recent end of the curve. You can select regions with trees of known warming signal and ignore adjacent trees to create the blade. You can even cut off data which doesn’t work out for you and paste temperature data right on the end. In short — guaranteed success every single time!!

So of course having 23 dendroclimatologists who take 54 separate tree ring reconstructions and put them all together with a nonsensical unjustifiable method that breaks down to a simple average is just par for the course and no surprise to anyone. In their minds, and the minds of various other dimwits, it is absolute proof of the robustness of their field.

D’Arrigo published a ridiculous comment which makes my point perfectly:

Several recent opponents of anthropogenically-forced global warming are familiar with statistics
but have not personally developed tree-ring or other proxy data or reconstructions themselves.
They claim that there are methodological artifacts that could bias, in particular, the Mann et al.
(1999) “hockey stick” reconstruction, and by inference, other reconstructions as well. Attempts
to refute this claim have been published by several authors (e.g. Mann et al. 2005, Rutherford et
al. 2005, Wahl and Ammann in press). However, the methods utilized by the various other studies
are often quite different and most are derived in a more straightforward manner than the much cited
“hockey stick” method (Mann et al. 1999). For example, the D’Arrigo et al. (2006)
reconstruction was developed using simple averaging of tree-ring records (after accounting for
differences in mean and variance over time), followed by linear regression. Care was taken to
evaluate the robust nature of the reconstructions developed in this case, rigorously testing for
model validity and potential bias. Thus, for the D’Arrigo et al. (2006) study and likely others,
there exists no “methodological artifact” which might have biased results in favor of a conclusion
of unusual recent large-scale warming. Therefore, we find the concern that there is “some kind of
methodological artifact that somehow reverberates throughout nearly all of the reconstructions
and that has gone unappreciated by people in the field” to be unfounded.
There has also been accusation of bias in site selection or so-called “cherry picking”, in which it
has been argued that dendrochronologists only include those sites that show global warming for
use in the tree-ring reconstructions. Instead, we maintain that we purposely select those trees and
sites which portray low-frequency information. Coherent trends between some tree-ring records
are indicative of a common response to large-scale temperature changes. We also pre-screened
the tree-ring records used in our reconstruction against individual station records and gridded
climate data, to evaluate their more localized response to temperature (D’Arrigo et al. 2006).
Only certain types of sites (e.g. due to their ecological characteristics) can provide large-scale
temperature information. This is by its very nature a subjective, non-quantifiable process and we
make no apologies for selecting these kinds of trees and sites to reconstruct temperature
variability. Such a signal can often be readily observed by examining core samples in the field (e.g.
increased growth in the 20th century, decreased growth during cold periods of the so-called Little
Ice Age, etc), or in tree-ring chronologies even prior to any calibration or modeling with
instrumental temperatures.

Right in the middle of the thing our resident genius admits to throwing out data which goes against the theory that the trees are measuring temperature. Those trees that DO correlate to temp, have some magic and unknowable property which binds them inextricably to temperature for all time.  Somehow this magic also doesn’t allow them to be identified any other way than after looking at the data.  Really old trees that exist prior to the temperature record are usually left unsorted.  We readers of such drek, typically have no idea how many trees must be examined before a magic ‘thermometertree’ is selected because the expert scientists don’t bother to tell us.  Now the sets are so predetermined that experts don’t even look at non-sanctioned data so we have a functional presort as a defacto standard.  D’Aroigo may make no apologies for the statistical scatology being peddled but it doesn’t mean that it is defensible or even remotely scientific. In fact, were the ‘scientists’ to do the job correctly the rejection vs acceptance of trees during sorting IS quantifiable and can be used to statistically determine if the trees have a valid signal, but a far less biased and more scientific person than Rosanne D’Arrigo is clearly required.

We have repeatedly covered how there is an infinite variety of variance amplification math available to dendroclimatology. The argument to the validity of hockeysticks due to the numerous methods are used to the same conclusion is complete nonsense for this reason. So in the superstick of Wilson 2016, I wanted to know what methods were used to create the curves eventually averaged together in our brand new Wilson 2016 hockeystick.

To that end, I took my time and read the method used in ALL papers used to create the 54 series in Wilson 2016. It took me all afternoon. I put the methods used by the authors in each series, in the table below so that readers could see the distribution of nonsense making up this new and improved hockey stick.  For each reviewed method, I determined if it was remotely reasonable. As you may know, there are plenty of hidden details in the dendroclimatology world that can only be uncovered by replication – and luck. SO…..If it even had a tiny chance of being the simple average suggested by D’Arrigo in the quote above, I put a resounding YES in the column with the heading “Statistically defensible”. If I couldn’t tell due to paper access or difficulty in understanding what was going on – I put a Maybe. Of the 54 series used in this hockey stick, that left an insane 43 big, fat, NO’s.

No way they could be defensible.

No way they would pass muster in a rational field.

No possible way that the series at the end of the paper has any use whatsoever. Yet our nearly two dozen ‘experts’ were perfectly happy to average them out just to show the world the robustness and amazingness of their cutting-edge field.

I had 4 yesses, 7 maybes and 43 No’s. If I was wrong on the No’s half the time, which I am not, that would leave 21.5 bad series still used. But the real answer is 43 or 80% of the data is complete and utter garbage having hockey stick blades created by mathematical artifact rather than actual data.


Article referenced Method used Statistically defensible method
D’Arrigo et al. (2004) linear regresssion produced hockey stick blade No
Wiles et al. (2014) regression analysis No
Davi et al. (2003); principal componenets — paywalled No
Anchukaitis et al. (2013) inverse linear regression No
Youngblut and Luckman (2008); paywalled Maybe
Szeicz and MacDonald [1995]; linear regression paywalled No
Wilson et al. (2014) regression analysis – paywalled No
Luckman and Wilson (2005) rcs and curve fit with average – no real hs Yes
Biondi et al., [1999]; curve fit to series and average — no hs Yes
Anchukaitis et al. (2013) inverse linear regression No
Anchukaitis et al. (2013) inverse linear regression No
Schneider et al. (2015) ad hoc regression:calculating weighted composites based on moving correlations with local temperature; extremely poor No
Gennaretti et al. (2014) linear scaling to local temperature No
Payette (2007); paywalled Maybe
D’Arrigo et al. (2003 (RW) and 2013 arstan RCS and average Yes
Rydval et al. (in preparation) not pubished Maybe
Dorado-Linan et al. (2012) regression and variance matching No
Buentgen et al. (2006). mean and SD scaling during temperature calibration period prior to reconstruction Maybe
Schneider et al. (2015) ad hoc regression:calculating weighted composites based on moving correlations with local temperature; extremely poor No
Zhang et al. (2015) RCS and something else — not sure exact method Maybe
Linderholm et al. (2014) linear regression No
Esper et al. (2014) and RCS and average -no hs apparent No
McCarroll et al. (2013) regression and variance matching – paywalled No
Büntgen et al. (2013) mean and SD scaling during temperature calibration period prior to reconstruction No
Klesse et al. (2014) paywalled Maybe
Helama et al. (2014) A unique intermixing of temperature information onto proxy data – ugly No
McCarroll et al. (2013) regression and variance matching – paywalled No
Schneider et al. (2015) ad hoc regression:calculating weighted composites based on moving correlations with local temperature; extremely poor No
Briffa et al. (2013) RCS and average — yamal HS, others not Yes
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Wilson et al. (2007) only use proxies which correlate to temperature others removed from usage – big joke No
Schneider et al. (2015) ad hoc regression:calculating weighted composites based on moving correlations with local temperature; extremely poor No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Schneider et al. (2015) ad hoc regression:calculating weighted composites based on moving correlations with local temperature; extremely poor No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Davi et al. (2015) principal componenets — paywalled No
Jacoby et al. (2000); RCS averaging, PCA first eigenvector only shows decline in warming years no HS No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
Cook et al. (2012) statistical screening based on correlation to temperature No
D’Arrigo et al. (2014) select region of positive correlation to temp, principal components regression of 6 favorite series with temp No
Hughes et al. (1999); paywalled Maybe

So instead of a validation of the robustness of the data, or the robustness of the field, what we have is is a paper demonstrating the robust willingness of climate scientists to sell trickery as science for both money and for the cause. These authors should be ashamed but even when caught truncating series, they simply push on producing ever more garbage for the small brained sheep in the media, politics and the public to use as propaganda for the government agenda.


Posted in Uncategorized | 70 Comments »

Yet Another Blog Kerfuffle

Posted by Jeff Id on December 15, 2015

Blogging is about connection to your readers.  In my heyday, this blog had 15000 views per day.   This was due in large part to climategate emails being discovered right here, despite some revisionist history still in process. This blog was in the middle of some fairly controversial climate blog issues at the time and became a second (and more open) choice for those people who risked so much to release the emails.  My willingness to take risks and say truth attracted the link.  It also attracted TWO psychology studies on different continents alleging that someone called ‘Condon’ (some guy with a lot of patents, numerous technical achievements and a fair sized company) couldn’t be scientifically objective.  I may not be Einstein but it is hard to dismiss success.

Keep in mind that Climategate exposed scientists lying to make a case. It isn’t our fault that climate scientists lie – they are being very well paid to do so and the stars of the field really believe that shutting down industry is for your own good.

Prior to climategate, this blog had 5000 views per day and was growing fast. That readership level exceeded my hometown newspaper at the time.   So what causes that sort of readership.  Certainly informational posting activity on the blog is #1, but equally a mutual understanding is a second factor.   People need information, a different viewpoint, and this did NOT come from me.  It came from commenters, blog readers, seeking a more intellectual outlet for their thoughts.  I learned more than I wrote because that is what smart people do.  Many attached themselves to this blog because of my willingness to admit error-  something I’ve seen far too little of on other blogs.   To those unwilling bloggers — It really doesn’t hurt as bad as it sounds.  Some attached here for the purpose of critiquing skeptics, climate scientists came here because of the open atmosphere.

I miss those days because of the fun.  Unfortunately, I have far less time for such nonsense these days.  Far less being greater than zero, I’ve decided to post today.

I left a comment a Lucias blog about Muslims.   I’m not a fan of Muslim culture and I knew it would be controversial.   I despise beyond reason the oppression of women.  I literally hate it.   I despise the vocal intolerance of Muslim countries toward other religions.   There is simply no soft way to put it.  I am intolerant of intolerance.  The fact that women can’t drive in Saudi Arabia, that they need 4 male witnesses to prove rape,  they need men to accompany them in public.   The boys love their culture and it is easy to see why but it is quite archaic and notwithstanding its existence, unacceptable in modern life.

The problem with Muslims is that far too many of them wish to use the Koran to justify taking away the rights of other people.  To force them into believing in an illogical and impossible god and then to murder them if they don’t agree.  This isn’t a fringe opinion of their culture, as much as we would like to imagine otherwise.  Pew research has a poll which found that 1 percent of American Muslims believe that suicide bombing and other extreme violence is often necessary – to protect Islam.  Worse, 7 percent believe it is sometimes necessary.  Here is the quote:

In the United States, a 2011 survey found that 86% of Muslims say that such tactics are rarely or never justified. An additional 7% say suicide bombings are sometimes justified and 1% say they are often justified in these circumstances.

The article seemed to focus more on the moderate statements of most Muslims in the survey but that 7 and 1 percent are horribly alarming.  There are different stats on the population of Muslims in the United states, but a census in 2010 showed 2.6 million.   If these numbers are accurate that means we have at least 26,000 muslims in the US who believe that suicide bombing is often necessary to protect Islam.   Worse yet, 182,000 believe that these tactics should be used sometimes.

These are not small numbers and the poll showed that they were far greater overseas.

Unfortunately for us all, this is not a healthy culture.   When such huge fractions of American Muslims see murder of children as excusable for their invisible man in the sky, I am simply not ok with it.  I don’t know about you, but my little boys deserve a full and free life devoid of senseless murder.   The problem runs very deep in their culture when you can produce such high rates of evil beliefs.

This whole thing started when I read an entire thread of commentary at The Blackboard climate blog. I saw several people comparing Christian evils with Muslim ones, an opinion which is so inaccurate it had to be replied to.

Some quotes from the thread:

“How about militant Christian violence? How many mass shootings and individual assassinations do we have to cite before we agree that this religion, with such a bloody and violent history, is a threat to our society”

“Calling people hypocrites because they apply different standards to Muslims than other groups such as Christians is not resorting to a tu quoque fallacy. It’s not saying their logic is wrong because of the double standards; it’s saying they’re hypocrites because of the double standards.And in my case, it’s saying those double standards make them look like bigots, because there is no logical or moral reason for using double standards. The only reason to apply different logical arguments based solely upon which group is being considered is bias. Biased treatment of people based upon their ethnicity or religion is bigotry.”

And this quote which really set the wheel in motion:

DeWitt, hopefully you aren’t totally oblivious to reality.

For example, we have a supposedly Christian man attack and kill 9 people in a black Church.

Response from the right: “He’s crazy obviously.”

Another supposedly Christian man attacks and kills 6 people at a Sikh temple.

Response from the right “The guy’s obviously insane”.

We have two supposedly Muslim people attack and kill 14.

Response from the right: “Obviously this is Islamic terrorism. ”

In alternative universe where a Muslim walked into a church and killed 9 people, a Muslim goes in and kills 6 more at another church and a Christian couple killed 14 co-workers, I don’t have any doubt which ones of these you guys would be discussing.

It went on and on — 500 plus comments.   Eventually I replied with this apparent smoker….

I’ve read this entire thread today and am surprised by many of the opinions here. A bit of common sense seems in order.

One problem Americans and modern westerners have is the fact that we have all been taught to accept all religion as though all religion is equal. The comments by several comparing Christian evils to those of Islam are so fantastically deluded I can’t even begin. Yes there are bad people of all relgions, but the reality of Islam as it is practiced can be seen across the cultures of the middle east. The repression of women legally and physically is rather hard to miss, as is what happens to those who wish to leave Islam. Then there is the blatantly obvious cries of god is great while committing mass murder as is vociferously advocated by their religious leaders. Which modern Christian religious leaders are calling for mass murder in exchange for going to heaven?

Almost to damned ignorant to discuss.

These are distinctly anti-western values. These values are things I want no part of in my country. Despite the demands of the intolerant left, I see no reason why I should accept these ignorant views as equal to my own. Like religion, or ridiculous political opinion, or Sharia law, all views are not created equal. There are many here who have already called this intolerance, I call it common sense.

There are plenty of muslims who act moderate and therefore see islam as good, but there are plenty of liberals who think what Obama has done to America is good too. I watched a video of a few guys with Jesus loves shirts be attacked physically and verbally by a crowd of hundreds of muslims in Dearborn Michigan. I was born in that area and much of my family grew up there. The influx of Muslims to that region has now almost fully displaced Christians and despite there being plenty of opportunities for the ‘peaceful’ muslims to speak out against intolerance, there was nothing but middle east style culture in evidence. Like the European no-go zones, the police refused to intervene.

No common sense moderate Muslims in sight. None of the outrage at how these Christians were being treated that you would expect from modern moderate muslims. I’m sure there was some outrage actually, but the religion as practiced doesn’t allow dissent and those who would speak out in that crowd would likely be punished.

Note that these United States muslims aren’t the ones being bombed. They aren’t the ones being persecuted. The only thing they have in common with the middle east muslims is their religion – and apparently their intolerance of any other religion.

We certainly don’t need more of that in the US or anywhere else in the world. I’m no fan of Trump either because it doesn’t make sense to me to trade one narcissist for another, but I certainly wouldn’t mind stopping all muslim immigration for a period of time. I’ve seen enough of it and want no part of their archaic lifestyle, belief system, repression of women, nor do we need to add another layer of nonsensical Sharia law. It certainly wouldn’t harm the US to say no to Syrian immigrants either. The very slight additional risk of bringing any of these people over is not worth it in my opinion, but compared to the rest of the nightmare this nonsensical world is, the issue barely makes the radar.

I don’t have any real answers to any of this but when faced with a group which behaves in a manner incompatible with freedom, we must see it with clear eyes. We cannot pretend that evils by individual Christians are equal to Imams demanding self-sacrifice against innocent people so their followers can go to heaven. It’s simply not a reasonable opinion to hold.

Definitely a strong comment, which I do believe is accurate.   The evidence of the video however, caused Brandon Shollenberger to go off the deep end and post a blog using the video part of my comment only and left the rest of the context out.   I’m rather pissed at him for his mischaracterizations and hadn’t realized just how far some people would go to defend evil behaviors but the internet never seems to have a lower bound.

I know there are moderate Muslims who are also offended by the behaviors of some in their religion, but I do not believe they see the impact of Islam with clear eyes.   There is beauty in religion, however, the dark side of Islam is far stronger than Christianity has ever been.  That is not to say that the old testament is not full of evils as well, but the evils are not preached to the masses as the way to heaven, nor are they practiced by Christians anywhere in the world.   It is not written or taught in that manner currently.   In Islam, the threats to destroy all of Israel, America, Christians come right from their leaders.   Right from those in charge, to the masses of believers, and that is a major difference.   If you can’t see it, I cannot help you.

In the interest of full disclosure, as a decent undergraduate engineering student, I was tasked with guiding two masters electrical engineers through their final theses, as they had failed at getting their projects done.   I was near graduation and was about to start my own masters ME degree but the level of trust from my professors was quite high at that time looking back.   One student was Palestinian and the other a Muslim Pakistani.   The Muslim would stop and pray during his intervals right in the middle of experiments and seemed very devout.   One day he told me that he wanted to kill a Christian for Allah.   It was right out of the blue, an engineering student being helped through his degree by a young man raised Catholic.  I told him I was Christian and asked if he would kill me.  He replied that he would.  This was back in about 1992 and well before the extremism became big news. The conversation ended when I told him good luck with that and we never spoke of it again.   They both graduated with my help.

My uncle was a lawyer who worked in the world trade center.   He was out of the office when the first bombings took place and he was at a dentists appointment when the planes hit.  Two attacks on a member of my family whom these people had never met also color my views, I think in a reasonable and cautious way, but you may not.

So I will leave it here with a couple of questions:

Considering the level of extremism in Islam as it is currently practiced, what is wrong with a temporary ban on immigration of Muslims?  There are no constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion for non-citizens.  No guarantee of immigration rights.  Even if we don’t hit one of the 8% who believe suicide bombing is a good thing for Islam, there is definitely an increased risk that the person we are accepting into America will want to replace our laws with archaic and evil Sharia law.   The individuals are more likely to have a distaste for our freedoms and want to return half our population to servitude.  Sure we most often will find a moderate with respect to terrorism, but not always, and that is no guarantee on their political views.

The second question I ask is whether it is bigotry or intolerant to have my opinions as expressed above when it is my personal and family safety as well as our way of life I am protecting?  It seems reasonable that when people are being killed in the name of a belief system where leaders demand that their followers murder for god, a certain pragmatism should take effect.  At what point is common sense outweighed by the need to be fair to other beliefs?


Warning to commenters.  This is an inflammatory topic by its nature so the thread will be moderated.   Lets avoid name calling and stick to the topic.



Posted in Uncategorized | 328 Comments »