Jill Stein makes a statement on Russian Interference in the 2016 Election

Today, Jill Stein handed documents to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and is cooperating with their investigation.  Stein pointed out that:

Concerns about foreign interference should not distract us from interference in plain sight originating from within our own borders. That includes the actions of the Democratic National Committee, which biased its party’s own primaries, effectively disenfranchising millions of Bernie Sanders’ voters; corporate media that gave Donald Trump billions in extra free airtime because he was “damn good” for network profits, in the words of CBS’ CEO; or voter suppression schemes like voter ID laws, Interstate Crosscheck and felon disenfranchisement that systematically deny millions of Americans their constitutional right to vote. 

While there is no "constitutional right to vote" in the US despite it being the foundation of a democratic (or republican) society, I agree with the sentiments expressed by her.[1]

She points out that the internal meddling of Cambridge Analytica was far more egregious than the Russians, which is something that isn't really new. However, it is something which needs to be reiterated:

The cutting-edge tactics of the Cambridge Analytica scandal make alleged Russian social media meddling look primitive and insignificant by comparison. Cambridge Analytica is accused of using without permission the private information of up to 87 million people, assembling thousands of data points on individuals to craft micro-targeted messages in a campaign of mass manipulation with the scale and sophistication of military-style psy-ops. The actions of the Russian Internet Research Agency, on the other hand, appear to be the opposite of sophisticated and strategic. The lack of targeting, timing and relevance of the vast majority of their Facebook ads underscores the doubts expressed by investigative reporters who’ve suggested the Internet Research Agency may in fact be a “click-bait” factory intended to generate advertising revenue, and not an election meddling operation. The insignificant numbers of the Internet Research Agency’s social media posts - compared to the vastness of the social media universe -  further diminishes the claim that it had significant impact on the election outcome. Facebook posts from the Internet Research Agency amounted to a mere 0.0004% of total Facebook content; Russian-associated tweets accounted for 0.02% of election related tweets, and Russian-linked Youtube videos had hit totals only in the hundreds, hardly the stuff of viral transmission.

I agree with her that the internal US meddling and obstruction of democracy is far more of a problem than "Russian interference".

You can read her statement here.
https://www.jill2016.com/stein_senate_statement?utm_campaign=senate_cmpn_blast&utm_medium=email&utm_source=jillstein

See also her interview with the Real News Network.

Footnotes:

1. The right to vote is the foundation of any democracy. Yet most Americans do not realize that we do not have a constitutionally protected right to vote. While there are amendments to the U.S. Constitution that prohibit discrimination based on race (15th), sex (19th) and age (26th), no affirmative right to vote exists.

Sorry, Dems and Pundits, but Hillary was only a small part of my decision in 2016

I am looking at the Guardian and seeing headlines such as:

Hopes of mild climate change dashed by new research 

Bad news for climate contrarians – 'the best data we have' just got hotter 

'We're doomed': Mayer Hillman on the climate reality no one else will dare mention

Despite headlines like these, this topic was pretty much absent from the Presidential debates. Hillary Clinton put up a statement about this issue on her website, but that was negated by this exchange between her and a Greenpeace volunteer:

Quite frankly, the only candidate who was addressing the issues that concerned me (the environment, election reform, etc) was Jill Stein.

Hillary seemed to be running on the fact that she was a woman and wasn't Donald Trump. Let's toss in that the primary election and selection of the Democratic candidate has been shown to be a farce.

The US political system is broken, but it won't get fixed by supporting the two party system. Also, it won't get fixed as long as people are in denial (RUSSSIANS!). Two of the worst presidents have gained office through the electoral college. Do we need to end up with a real idiot as president for people to see change is necessary?

Conservatives are Duh duh dumbing down America

You have to enjoy a sense of humor, and appreciate that fact is consistently stranger than fiction.

I recall the famous chair of the U of MN department of economics at the time, Walter Heller, opening one of his lectures with the line that all of the economists in the world laid end to end around the equator still could not reach a conclusion.  Well, as with the scientific consensus on global warming, it appears that an overwhelming preponderance of economists in the world likewise agree about the adverse results of Brexit.  And scientists agree (although they may differ on details) about the validity of the science of evolution.

The monument to ignorance, aka the Noah's Ark theme park in Kentucky inappropriately funded by public $$$$ just opened.......wait for it........to severe storms and flooding.  One has to wonder, following the pseudo-logic of many Christians, if God was expressing his disapproval?

The Ark is part of the anti-science / pro-creationism propaganda circulated by Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis  religious rubbish group.  The exhibit includes replicas of dinosaurs, two by two. 

Bill Nye correctly expressed the following rational, reasoned, and well-researched point of view as to the perils of pseudo-science on children:

"The influence is strong. I spoke with a lot of kids (and took a great many selfies). Almost all of them do not accept that humans are causing climate change — and that is the Answers In Genesis ministry's fault. Through its dioramas and signage, the organization promotes ideas that are absolutely wrong scientifically, while suppressing critical thinking in our students — which is in no one's best interest, conservative or progressive."

While it is possible the low turnout reported at the Ark monument to ignorance is the fault of bad weather, it is also possible that the Ark is one giant "turkey" as these projects go.  Bill Nye the science guy, a well-regarded proponent of science education and deemed one of our more successful science communicators noted:

"On a hopeful note, the parking lots were largely empty, and the ark building is unfinished. We can hope it will close soon."

On July 10th we celebrated, if celebrate is the correct word for it, the 90th anniversary of the Scopes "Monkey Trial" in Tennessee over the legal ban on the teaching of evolution.  Scopes was initially convicted (he DID teach evolution) but the conviction was overturned.  It is appalling that 90 years after the Scopes trial, we are still fighting the same battles with the anti-science Bible thumpers.

Sadly, as we see with the silly Ark in Kentucky, as well as continuing efforts by the crazy evangelical right to insert creationism into public spheres and into the public square (on the public nickle), not only in Tennessee but elsewhere I am appalled at the poor state of science literacy in a large segment of our political spectrum.

One has only to look at what is proffered as arguments against anthropogenic global warming (or to look at how often it is necessary to explain what anthropogenic means as a preface to holding a conversation) to appreciate the willful ignorance.

I am an unabashed science geek, a nerd; I spent a part of my last weekend binge watching a DVD from my local library on various scientific debates in paleoanthropology.  I particularly enjoyed the parts about how some sections of DNA respond differently to mutation that those which represent characteristics 'under selection'.  While enjoying binge watching science, I couldn't help but feel disconnected from so many people I know and interact with on a daily basis.

The DVD and accompanying brief book is part of the Great Courses series; this one was The Rise of Humans: Great Scientific Debates, presented by John Hawks of the University of WI, Madison.  While this particular presentation dates from 2011, and is therefore already out of date in a few respects, the combination of the sciences of Paleo-anthropology with molecular genetics.  The application of molecular genetics provided new understanding of when and how species diverged using fossil remains.

What struck me so strongly in the larger context of the anti-expert, anti-'elite', anti-science message which I viewed on right wing blogs in the context of dismissing the conclusions of economists about the outcomes of Brexit in the UK, and in attempting to discredit scientists working on global warming, was the notion that we can AND SHOULD ignore people who actually know things, who study things, and who do practical as well as theoretical work in their respective fields. 

The DVD lecture by Dr. Hawks began with the scientific controversy over Ramapithecus, as to where it belonged and 'when' it belonged in the primate family tree.  Molecular genetics demonstrated that it was too old to be a direct human ancestor, but rather belonged elsewhere and further back in time than hominis (humans and those species closely related).  How the debate reflected the scientific process was as illuminating as the specifics of the debates.

In that context it is worth noting that the Pew Research Center study in 2014 and 2015 on Religion in Public Life found :

Roughly six-in-ten respondents in the 2014 Religious Landscape Study (62%) say humans have evolved over time, while about a third (34%) say humans have always existed in their present form, similar to other recent Pew Research surveys.
...Among those who believe that humans evolved, there is disagreement over whether this evolution has been due to natural processes or guided by a supreme being. A third of U.S. adults believe evolution has occurred due to natural processes, while a quarter say a supreme being guided evolution.

About two-thirds of Catholics (66%) and mainline Protestants (65%) believe humans evolved over time. By contrast, most Jehovah’s Witnesses (74%) and evangelical Protestants (57%) and about half of Mormons (52%) reject this view, saying human beings have always existed in their present form.

Atheists (95%) and agnostics (96%) in the survey nearly universally say humans evolved over time, and most believe that evolution has occurred through natural processes. Majorities of Buddhists, Hindus and Jews also hold this view.

Overall, respondents with a college degree are more likely than those with less education to say humans evolved over time due to natural selection. However, the impact of education varies across religious groups. Members of mainline and historically black Protestant churches, Catholics and religious “nones” with a college degree all are more likely than their less well-educated counterparts to say humans evolved over time. But evangelical Protestants with a college degree are no more likely than those without a college degree to say humans have evolved.

Conservatives would argue that moving a species represented by the fossil record to a different organizational position in understanding evolution would completely discredit all studies and conclusions in the sciences of evolution.  It does not.  Understanding how scientific debate and new science research result in some changes -- but also result in confirmation of other findings -- is an important part of science literacy that is antithetical to what passes as reasoning about science information on the right.  Sadly that is apparently missing, or is deliberately denied and ignored on the right in what appears to be willful ignorance.

Rather the right consistently engages in magical thinking, in extreme confirmation bias, and in denial of anything that does not comfortably fit their world view, which is appalling intellectual dishonesty and folly for determining policy decisions for the nation and the world.  Instead we have 56% of Republicans in Congress (more on some days) denying man-made global warming, evolution, and basic macro-economics.  Only a handful of states do not have climate deniers in their delegations to the House or Senate.  Are these politicians expressed beliefs sincere?  Nah, I would argue they don't care one way or the other what the truth is, they just find it profitable to pander to ignorance.  Because those same voters are for smaller government - even though there is no evidence that smaller government serves the country or the citizens well, nor is there objective evidence that our government has been too large.  And those same voters will act passionately but not rationally on regressive cultural attitudes regarding minorities -- be it equal treatment of women, of the LGBT, or ethnic minorities.

With promotion of ignorance, with the promotion of propaganda which can be defined as meeting the two criteria of being factually false, AND promoting emotional response rather than critical thinking,  the right has developed a rank and file that is easily deceived and even more easily manipulated into voting for bad decisions, bad policy, and destructive attitudes that are actively harmful to significant sectors of our nation.  Too often as with Brexit, as with Global Warming, and as with promoting anti-science Creationism, there is also self-destructive voting.

Conservatives MUST GO!

These are factual figures. Conservatives are lousy at governance, and especially poor at economic policy and foreign policy --- and those two are both closely connected to our failed energy policy. To see the actual statistics on how bad these obsessive ideology failures really are, see the graphic below.

Via Occupy Democrats on Facebook:

Conservatives still believe the debunked nonsense promoted by Art Laffer -- who is currently the personal architect of the failed government tax policy in Kansas.  Tax cuts do not increase revenue, increase job growth or increase growth of GDP.

From Fact and Myth:

Do Tax Cuts Increase Revenues? No, Tax cuts do not Increase Revenue
“The Bush tax cuts led to 50 consecutive months of job growth…It’s demonstrably proven that tax cuts increase revenues” – Rush Limbaugh

The argument that tax cuts create or increase revenue is an old myth that simply refuses to go away. The logic behind this argument is that cutting taxes will stimulate spending (since investors now are  now encouraged through reduced tax rates) that will result in GDP growth.  This growth in GDP will result in increased tax revenues so significant that they will more than offset the drop in tax revenues that result from a lowered tax rate. The inverse to this is that increased taxes lower tax revenue by discouraging investment, which in turn lowers tax revenues so drastically, that they offset the added increase coming from the tax rate increase. One of the reasons Republicans and other self-ascribed fiscal conservatives are able to get away with this is, is the superficially plausible argument that the Reagan and/or Bush tax cuts grew the economy and created revenue.  To understand the fallacy of these arguments, it is necessary to understand economic growth during business cycles and over a long period of time, and how this affects tax revenues.

Correlating Tax Increases and Decreases with Revenue

By conveniently pointing to places where tax cuts were enacted at or around the time of a recovery or boom, tax cut advocates argue that tax cuts increase revenue.   The problem with this is that the revenue increases following the Bush and Reagan tax cuts are dwarfed by the revenue increase following Bill Clinton’s tax increase on the wealthiest Americans.  In fact, as a percentage of GDP, post-Reagan & Bush tax cut revenue falls below the 1965-2005 average. In other words, revenue increased because the economy was recovering/growing, and the tax cuts have little (probably nothing) to do with growth in GDP.  if anything, these tax cuts actually lowered revenue increased from what they would have been otherwise.  So the real question to ask is this: how much revenue did these tax cuts cost us?  See Historical Tax Rates.

Half of the right wing are evangelicals.  From CBS news earlier this year:

White Evangelicals are half of GOP primary voters

(CBS News) NEW YORK -- With nominating contests completed in 27 states and nearly 40 percent of Republican National Convention delegates allocated, Republican primary voters are showing a record-breaking religious bent.
So far, 50 percent of Republican primary and caucus voters have been white evangelical, or born again, Christians, based on CBS News polling of voters entering or exiting their polling places since the first contest in January.
The data comes from entrance polls in two caucus states, Iowa and Nevada, and exit polls in 14 primary states - Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont and Virginia.
"Conservative people of faith are playing a larger role in shaping the contours and affecting the trajectory of the Republican presidential nomination contest than at any time since they began pouring out of the pews and into the precincts in the late 1970's," said Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, who called our attention to the numbers today.
Reed said conservative Christian turnout among Republicans exceeds its rate from four years ago, when 44 percent of white Republican primary voters described themselves as evangelical. They're not only a factor in the South but also in general election battleground states like Ohio, where 47 percent of Republican primary voters subscribed to the label this year.
Reed estimated that through the primaries in Alabama and Mississippi this past Tuesday, more than 4 million evangelical Christian voters had participated in those 16 primaries and caucuses where entrance or exit polls were conducted by CBS and other news organizations.
"They are indispensable to any winning strategy for the eventual Republican presidential nominee in both the primaries and the general election. Any candidate who ignores these voters and the values that motivate them does so at their own peril," Reed said.

As a general thing, participation in democracy is a good thing.  But because conservatives have engaged in wholesale voter suppression of any demographic that doesn't vote for their candidates and causes, it actually results in the hijacking of representative government, and the inevitable resulting epic failures of fanatics in control. 

Evangelicals specifically, and conservatives generally, appear to struggle with the basic concepts of cause and effect.  They engage in what amounts to magical thinking as a preference to rational thought, and to embrace religious superstitious insanity in the face of overwhelming logic and data.

It is no accident that American secular democracy arose in the era of the highly secular, pro-science  Age of Enlightenment.  And yet we still see stupidity like this, which has no place in government and which is the last thing our founding fathers and mothers wanted to see empowered or respected. 

It doesn't matter if the willful ignorance is the economic policies of Art Laffer and his stupid curve, or the religious right superstitious insistence on controlling everyone's sex choices because they are a bunch of sexuality hating prudes.  They are bad for America, They have to GO.

From the Huff Po :

State Rep Suggests Abortion Is To Blame For California Drought

Scientists are still exploring the causes of California's historic drought, but one local lawmaker thinks it might all come down to one thing: God's wrath over abortion.
While speaking at the California ProLife Legislative Banquet last week, California Assemblywoman Shannon Grove (R) suggested a theory that the state's worst drought in 1,200 years may be divine retribution for California providing women with access to abortions, RH Reality Check reported.
“Texas was in a long period of drought until Governor Perry signed the fetal pain bill,” she told the audience. “It rained that night. Now God has his hold on California.”
Grove was likely referring to House Bill 2, RH Reality Check noted, a Texas abortion bill banning abortions 20 weeks after fertilization, four weeks earlier than the standard set by Roe v. Wade.
Grove did not immediately respond to a request for confirmation that she made the statement at the event, but she elaborated on her theory in a Facebook comment.
"I believe --and most Americans believe --that God’s hand is in the affairs of man, and certainly was in the formation of this country," she wrote. "Is this drought caused by God? Nobody knows. But biblical history shows a consequence to man’s actions."

Dumb bunny and blond bimbo Shannon Grove is wrong.  The correct understanding of cause and effect is the  scientifically established and totally secular  anthropogenic global warming from fossil fuels and other human activity, OTHER THAN ABORTION OR GAY MARRIAGE AND GAY SEX.  These crazies control the right; the only need we have to take back America is from the ridiculous radical right wing nuts who have demonstrated that they are out of touch with REALITY --- and dangerously so.

Global Warming Denier States Underestimated the Threat of Avian Flu

A week ago, the Iowa Secretary of Agriculture claimed that avian flu wasn't going to be spreading.

From the Daily Iowan, a week ago today  (emphasis mine - DG):

Avian Flu not expected to spread in Iowa

The meat, eggs, and other products from millions of Iowa poultry infected with the H5N2 avian influenza won’t make it to the dinner table, but that’s not the only problem two infected farms could create for the state.

The H5N2 strain of avian influenza currently has not been found to transfer to humans in any way, Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey said Monday during a conference call.

He said the two Iowa farms that have confirmed cases of the highly pathogenic version of the avian flu could present problems for a variety of people. 

“There is other financial impact here as well,” he said. “Each [egg] layer will eat around one bushel per year of corn, so once these birds are euthanized, they won’t be using corn for a while.”

...The infected population includes 27,000 turkeys in Buena Vista County and 3.8 million egg-laying hens in Osceola County.

Northey said no other farms are currently under investigation and samples tested from farmers in those areas have all been negative.

“We believe this is not going from farm to farm,” he said. “We do not believe this is spreading in a way that is likely to create other problems on other farms.”

Yeah, THAT appears to be completely wrong, per this timeline update.

April 20 - The biggest outbreak so far as H5N2 is confirmed in 3.8 million egg-laying hens in Osceola county, Iowa. The finding in the country's top egg producing state prompts Mexico to expand its import ban to include live birds and eggs from Iowa.

April 27 - Iowa's Department of Agriculture and the USDA say initial tests have found probable bird flu outbreaks at five commercial poultry sites in Iowa containing more than 6 million birds. One site was confirmed as positive for HPAI a day later. If the other four are confirmed, the country's outbreak would reach more than 15.1 million birds, just short of the largest-ever U.S. avian influenza outbreak of 17 million birds in 1983 and 1984.

April 28 - The USDA confirms H5N2 in three more flocks, including a flock of 1.7 million chickens in Sioux county, Iowa, bringing the state's confirmed tally to more than 5.5 million birds. The three new confirmations lift the nationwide confirmed total to more than 11 million birds. (Reporting by Karl Plume in Chicago; Editing by Bernard Orr)

It remains to be seen how this avian flu outbreak progresses; some scientists expect it to continue to get worse.  Some scientists appear to be hoping that warmer weather might actually slow the outbreak and spread of avian flu, but lacking in confidence that this will be the case.  ALL of the scientists who have studied avian flu expect a big escalation of avian flu in the fall, when we have the migration of waterfowl from Canada heading south over the same ares, with additional concern that it will affect other bird populations including potentially pheasants.  This will in all probability lead to additional adverse affects not only in the ag sector, but in the tourism sector as it affects those who hunt both wild or domestic raised waterfowl, but also if it spreads to pheasants, which is already feared by those who raise pheasants for game preserve hunting (although shooting tame birds doesn't really seem like 'hunting' imho).

From Keloland.com, near the intersection of So.Dak, MN, and Iowa:

SPENCER, SD - South Dakota pheasant producers are closely watching the bird flu battle. They're concerned the strain that's already hit turkey and chicken farms might also infect their flocks.
Royal Flush Pheasants near Spencer, South Dakota raises about 10,000 pheasants every year.  Many of those birds end up in private hunting preserves.  An outbreak of bird flu could cost the Royal Flush a king's ransom.
Pheasants supply South Dakota's economy with a profitable nest egg.
"Cafes and restaurants and gas stations and hunting supply stores and that type of thing, it's a big business in South Dakota," Royal Flush Pheasants owner Denny Rowley said.
But these hardy and valuable ringnecks wouldn't stand a chance against the ravages of bird flu.
"A pheasant's a kind of tough bird, it's got cold winters, it's got hot summers, it's got pesticides, insecticides, you got guys shooting at it all the time, some coyote or fox is trying to eat it all the time, it's funny there's any of them here, you know," Rowley said.

The increasing cost of chicken and eggs, the decreasing supply of chicken and eggs, both in grocery stores and in restaurants, both sit down and fast food retailers, and the ripple effect of the avian flu on other sectors of our economy is very likely going to create greater problems reflecting in areas of wealth and income inequality, food insecurity, government cutbacks in food insecurity assistance, and in seasonal employment.

In other news, it has been incorrectly reported that Koch brothers' sock puppet Scott Walker declared a state of emergency in Wisconsin re: bird flu; what Walker actually did was write an executive order to send out a few National Guard troops to help distribute water to areas affected by avian flu.  What you WON'T find in Wisconsin is any reference to the role of global warming on the changing migration patterns of wild birds - a documented fact, as is that the original infections came from migrating wild birds; and you won't find any acknowledgement from Walker or any WI bureaucrat as to the role of global warming and the increase in pathogenicity in so-called 'high-path' avian flu strains spreading.

So far, the mainstream news has focused on relatively trivial issues, like the possible prohibition of poultry at the Minnesota state fair.  I predict that the problems associated with bird flu and with climate change / global warming as it affects US exports and US food supplies, and US public health concerns, is going to be a much more significant set of issues for the 2016 presidential race, senate races, and state level races than is currently predicted.  Most of all, I would expect that the division between global warming deniers and those who recognize the reality of the science as predictions become fact will  result in significant swings in our national, regional, state and local politics.  We are at a point where the impact which to many had seemed theoretical is now becoming real, in people's back yards and gocery carts.  Deniers are going to be finding themselves on the hot seat, and that hot seat is only going to get hotter for them.  Look forward to the (metaphorical) smoke of roasting conservative political tushies on the grill coming to politics near you. (Hint, it smells a bit like burning pork, only more acrid and acrimonious.)

Update: Governor declares Avian Flu State of Emergency

No surprise, we have more bird flu in Minnesota, not only among turkey farms but now outbreaks at chicken farms. Governor Dayton is releasing additional resources to combat the spread, up to and including making the National Guard units available to help.

Gov. Mark Dayton has declared a state of emergency in Minnesota in response to the bird flu outbreak, which has claimed the lives of 2.6 million turkeys and has now spread to a chicken farm for the first time in the state.
The Star Tribune reports that the governor’s order activates “an emergency operations plan” to provide support to attempts to quell the outbreak, and also says that National Guard personnel can be mobilized if necessary.

It comes after chicken producer J&A Farms, near Detroit Lakes in northwestern Minnesota, became the first chicken farm in the state to confirm an infection of the deadly H5N2 virus, KSTP reports. The farm has 275,000 hens.

Earlier on Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported the bird flu’s presence in 13 additional turkey flocks in Minnesota. That brought the state’s overall total to 44 across 15 counties.

The deadly avian flu has spread to 13 more Minnesota turkey farms, bringing the total number of birds affected to more than 2.5 million, the state Board of Animal Health announced.

...Since the outbreak of the virus in early March, 7.1 million turkeys and egg-laying chickens have been affected across the Midwest, The Associated Press reports.

Chicken operations in Iowa and Wisconsin have also been hit by the bird flu. There are 16 states now coping with the disease in commercial bird operations.

National media is running headlines that McDonalds may experience supply problems, with 'Chicken Mcnuggets as rare as hen's teeth'. I don't eat them, but it occurs to me that might be the only silver lining of a serious global warming related economic disaster to our state and regional economies. It is beginning to dawn on people that this will affect not only the price of turkey and chicken meat, but also the price of eggs -- and presumably therefore a variety of the 'golden starches' breakfast menu items as well as the nuggets.

The economic impact goes far further afield than just fast food retailers. The BBC is reporting protests against ongoing trade negotiations for US ag products to be marketed in Europe as a result of this outbreak. As with past food safety and disease issues, such as the mad cow problems of some years back, a variety of nations are banning the shipment of poultry products while this epidemic continues. having the reputation of unsafe or disease-ridden products is of course detrimental to the long term economic strength of our ag industry sector, and a serious concern for the entire country.

The head of the World Organisation for Animal Health tells us why this latest outbreak of bird flu has come as such a shock to US industry. Also, as the latest round of negotiations towards a new trade pact between Europe and the US get under way, we report on the opposition to the proposals, at a protest attended by Vivienne Westwood in London.

I documented here, on the 2015 celebration of Earth Day why this outbreak of avian flu is an issue of global warming, and the cause and effect link to rising temperatures and the spread of these kinds of disease, among both wildlife and domesticated animals, directly affecting our food supply and the affordability of the food we eat (not just fast food). From the STrib

DES MOINES, Iowa — Some international trade partners are declining to buy egg and poultry products from states affected by a deadly strain of bird flu while others are excluding imports only from counties where the virus has surfaced.

Agriculture officials say the food supply is safe. But Mexico, Japan and Canada are among 33 countries declining to accept poultry products from entire states, including Iowa, the nation's leading egg producer, and Minnesota, the top turkey grower in the U.S.

Other countries, including Hong Kong, limit the ban to counties where the virus has been confirmed.

Conservatives, who as a group receive enormous amounts of funding both directly and indirectly from fossil fuel sources, refuse to address the issue and actively obstruct others from addressing it.

 Most recently we have a member of our state legislature doing exactly that, on the floor of the lege, while following the classic tactic of pretending that conservatives are somehow victims and martyrs for believing things which are factually false - and seriously dangerous to all of us. I would further posit that it is precisely to take positions that are factual and objective that these legislators are elected, and NOT to be faith based or phantasy driven in writing legislation, voting or formulating policy. Hat tip to Bluestem Prairie and the Uptake for the video and news item on Rep. Jim Newberger, R-Becker. 

This is EXACTLY what we do NOT need or want in response to the challenges of global warming. This is the kind of failure to act and failure to think that is why we must oppose conservatives in any position of authority at any level of government, because of failing to address these issue in a manner that is rational, that is objective, that values science not religion as the basis for action. If we wanted whining, we'd look for two year olds who missed their nap time.

Rep. Newberger grow a pair, and act your age. You and the rest of the lege were elected to deal with these issues, to voice your opinions BASED ON FACTS NOT FAITH, and to do something about these kinds of problems on behalf of the citizens of Minnesota. Pull up your big boy pants, buckle up your belt and if necessary add a pair of suspenders, but ditch the crap about being a victim. DO SOMETHING about the very real problems of global warming; they are on our doorstep, right there where you live in Sherburne County. But don't kid yourself - something I suspect Newberger does often; the effects of this problem go much further afield than just Sherburne County, or the state boundaries, or even the national boundaries. We can't afford the kind of political and ideological driven denial that we see next door in Wisconsin, courtesy of Koch brothers' puppet Scott Walker as he trashes the state of Wisconsin, including by prohibiting any references or planning related to global warming.

Celebrate World Meteorological Day 2014! Acknowledge global warming and what we can do about it

 

Weather is different than climate.  Global warming is real.

World Meteorological Day 2014

Weather and climate: engaging youth

World Meteorological Day is celebrated every year on 23 March to commemorate the entry into force in 1950 of the convention that created the World Meteorological Organization. The day also highlights the huge contribution that National Meteorological and Hydrological Services make to the safety and well-being of society.

This year's World Meteorological Day theme is “Weather and climate: engaging youth." Today’s youth will benefit from the dramatic advances being made in our ability to understand and forecast the Earth’s weather and climate. At the same time, most of them will live into the second half of this century and experience the increasing impacts of global warming. WMO encourages young people to learn more about our weather and climate system and to contribute to action on climate change.

Hey Donald! Keep your hair on! Austraila burns while sea ice scientists are rescued

Australia burns - from Reuters

Record cold, but far more record heat......and birther nut Donald Trump goes nuts on climate change too. 

I wonder if he was in science class the day they taught about how warmer or hot water freezes more quickly than cold?  We know that ocean temperatures are warming.  We know that climate change does NOT posit that seasons will cease to exist, but rather that weather will become far more erratic and volatile, so we will also have record cold AND record heat and drought -- as we have.

The dumb Donald leaves out that yesterday, the day when sea ice scientists were rescued from sea ice, there were also sustained record HOT temperatures in Australia.  The Reuters report on the same day as the rescue notes those recorded sustained changes in climate have resulted in bush fires, and in ranchers having to slaughter their cattle because of the heat and drought.

Australia swelters after record hot 2013; farmers slaughter cattle, bushfire warning

(Reuters) - A searing heatwave is baking central and northern Australia, piling more misery on drought-hit cattle farmers who have been slaughtering livestock as Australia sweltered through the hottest year on record in 2013.Temperatures have topped 40 degrees Celsius (104 Fahrenheit)in large parts of Australia's key agricultural regions for most of the past week, with the mercury topping 48 degrees Celsius in the central west Queensland town of Birdsville.
The heatwave is moving east across Australia, prompting health warnings on Friday in some of the country's biggest cities and firefighters were already battling bushfires.
But it is in the outback that soaring temperatures have had the most devastating impact, especially on cattle farmers in Queensland, which accounts for about 50 percent on the national herd.
"Water supplies are fast diminishing and whatever feed supplies that were left are cooking off to the point where there won't be any left," said Charles Burke, a beef farmer and chief executive of Agforce, a Queensland cattle industry group.
"This drought is shaping to be an absolute disaster."
Monsoon rains in Australia's north failed last summer and the entire continent endured its hottest year since records began in 1910, the Bureau of Meteorology said on Friday.
Average temperatures were 1.2 degree Celsius above the long-term average of 21.8 degree Celsius, breaking the previous record set in 2005.

In view of all that, the inappropriate tweet from Trump is highly offensive.

from Salon:

Donald J. Trump        ✔ @realDonaldTrump Follow

This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps,and our GW scientists are stuck in ice

6:39 PM - 1 Jan 2014

He is as embarrassing and inappropriate as a climate change denier clown as he was a birther, where his kids had to do an intervention.   Trump is as wrong about global warming as he was when factcheck.org busted him lying as a birther.

Somebody hand the man a hat, to cover up that embarrassing comb-over, and a sock for the foot in his mouth.  We can't afford the stupidity that results from right wing science denial.

clown trump

Trump comb-over, blowing in his own hot air

the sock we have in mind
for the foot in his mouth

Climate Change Versus Climate Change Deniers

We are looking at more triple digit weather today, with 80 by early mornings; it will not only be hot, it will be hot early, with temperatures climbing quickly.   More of the same  above average temperatures are forecast through the week and into next week.
We have junk science, promoted by the science-denial right, and paid for consistently by a combination of the religious right anti-evolution crowd trying to contort and conform science to religion; and we have the Koch Brothers and other big money from fossil fuel producers paying for junk science to keep themselves rich and to avoid any appropriate changes away from those declining sources of energy.
When ideology tries to dominate science, the result is bad science and a lack of truth and a lack of fact.
Climate change predicted a very clear set of changes, or results, from greenhouse gases increasing.
Those changes have been realized; they're here, they can no longer be reasonably denied.
I can already here the ad hominem claims that the article I quote below is a left-leaning source.  For those who don't really understand what an ad hominem criticism is, it is where the accuracy and validity of the information contained is not addressed, but only some un-related aspect of the source.
This differs, for example, from my criticism of Faux News, where I consistently point out that the information is inaccurate, and then point out how consistently Faux News is inaccurate, which is not ad hominem, since the accuracy of the information is at issue. I do for example run Fox news items, usually from the local stations, rather than the national cable networks, where they ARE accurate, without that criticism.
So here from Mother Jones is some factually accurate reporting.  If you can't fault the facts, don't bother making an ad hominem criticism.

Odds of Record-Breaking Summer Heat Happening Without Climate Change? Try 1 in 1.6 Million.

—By Kate Sheppard

| Wed Jul. 11, 2012 12:54 PM PDT

Instant Vantage/Flickr

You don't need science to tell you it's been really crazy hot lately in much of the United States. But seriously, it's been really stinking hot. How hot? Well, the last 12 months have been the hottest since recorded-keeping started in 1895, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Average temperatures in the continental US for the month of June were a full 2 degrees above the average for the 20th century. It was even worse in Colorado, where temperatures for June were 6.4°F above average. In the latter half of June, 170 record temperatures were broken or tied, hitting 113 in South Carolina and 112 in Georgia, for just two examples.
Sure it's summer, and summer is supposed to be hot. But not this hot—not without global warming at least. NOAA's National Climatic Data Center says that the odds of this heat wave occurring randomly would be 1 in 1,594,323. Pretty low odds. Even critics of that figure say the chances of this summer happening without global warming would be extremely low at 1 in 100,000.
It's not just this year. A new paper published by the American Meteorological Society this month, highlighted in the New York Times on Wednesday, looked at the data on 2011. That paper found that the drought due to high temperatures in Texas last year were “distinctly more probable” than they would have been 40-50 years ago, thanks to global warming. And the high temperatures in the United Kingdom in November 2011 were made 62 times more likely to occur by global warming.
Of course, saying any specific weather event happened "because of" climate change is difficult. But the AMS paper does a good job of explaining what these attribution studies really show:

One analogy of the effects of climate change on extreme weather is with a baseball player (or to choose another sport, a cricketer) who starts taking steroids and afterwards hits on average 20% more home runs (or sixes) in a season than he did before. For any one of his home runs (sixes) during the years the player was taking steroids, you would not know for sure whether it was caused by steroids or not. But you might be able to attribute his increased number to the steroids. And given that steroids have resulted in a 20% increased chance that any particular swing of the player’s bat results in a home run (or a six), you would be able to make an attribution statement that, all other things being equal, steroid use had increased the probability of that particular occurrence by 20%.

Colbert Brilliance; Right Wing Bigotry and Their 'Science' Lies

The utter failure to accomplish the level of reason one would expect from anyone with a more developed intellect than an above average 4 year old epitomizes the problems with the right wing thinking in the anti-immigrant propaganda below.  The inconsistency and hypocrisy that global warming doesn't exist when it comes to fossil fuels and the manipulation of big oil money, but it does exist when it comes to immigrants from south of the border, that is classic right wing thinking.  That someone on the right would spend significant amounts of money to make a slick ad like this on such an obviously flawed premise, and run it is a classic example of irresponsibility with money as well as an indication of a total lack of integrity.

That it makes sense to the right wing extremists is sad, and a little scary; that they are involed in deterimining issues of government with such flaws in their thinking and belief systems is far more terrifying.  It continues to boggle my mind that the right neither sees the flaws in their thinking, nor the hateful bias, nor understands that they are not operating at the level of critical thinking the rest of the world practices.  This makes sense to at least some on the right, the more extreme fringies.  It should not pass with anyone as making sense.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - United We Can't Stand Them
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog Video Archive

Solyndra

Cross post-from MikeB

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Dog Gone added the Daily Show Clip

Solyndra has become known as a boondoggle in the US.  If you haven't heard, it's the solar power  company that got $500  million in Recovery Act loans from the Department  of Energy and then  went belly up a couple of weeks ago.

Conservatives have been trying to paint this as a big scandal of some   kind, despite the fact that: the company had plenty of private investors   too, it's the only DOE loan that has failed so far, and there's no  real  evidence that anyone in the White House did anything worse than  push OMB  to speed up their decision-making process a bit in 2009.

It’s often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was “rushed through” by the Obama Administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush Administration launched in 2007.

You’d never know from the media coverage that:

•     The Bush team tried to conditionally approve the Solyndra loan just before President Obama took office.


•     The company’s backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.


•     The loan comprises just 1.3% of DOE’s overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that’s known to be troubled.

The loan guarantee has been attacked as being political in nature because one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser, a man who donated money to the Obama campaign. What critics don’t mention is that one of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Wal-Mart, the Waltons and the Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years.

Climate Progress is publishing this timeline,  verified by Department of Energy officials,   that shows how the loan guarantee came together under both  administrations to set the record straight. In fact, rather than rushing the loan for Solyndra  through, the Obama Administration restructured the original Bush-era  deal to further protect the taxpayers’ investment:

May 2005: Just as a global silicon  shortage begins driving up prices of solar photovoltaics [PV], Solyndra  is founded to provide a cost-competitive alternative to silicon-based  panels.
July 2005: The Bush Administration signs the Energy Policy Act of 2005 into law, creating the 1703 loan guarantee program.
February 2006 – October 2006: In February, Solyndra  raises its first round of venture financing  worth $10.6 million from  CMEA Capital, Redpoint Ventures, and U.S.  Venture Partners. In October,  Argonaut Venture Capital, an investment  arm of George Kaiser, invests  $17 million into Solyndra. Madrone  Capital Partners, an investment arm  of the Walton family, invests $7  million. Those investments are part of a $78.2 million fund.
December 2006: Solyndra Applies for a Loan Guarantee under the 1703 program.
Late 2007: Loan guarantee program is funded. Solyndra was one of 16 clean-tech companies  deemed ready to move forward in the due diligence process. The Bush  Administration DOE moves forward to develop a conditional commitment.
October 2008: Then Solyndra CEO Chris Gronet touted reasons for building in Silicon Valley and noted that  the “company’s second factory also will be built in Fremont, since a  Department of Energy loan guarantee mandates a U.S. location.”
November 2008: Silicon prices remain very high on  the spot market, making non-silicon based thin film technologies like  Solyndra’s very attractive to investors. Solyndra also benefits from  having very low installation costs. The company raises $144 million from  ten different venture investors, including the Walton-family run  Madrone Capital Partners. This brings total private investment to more than $450 million to date.
January 2009: In an effort to show it has done  something to support renewable energy, the Bush Administration tries to  take Solyndra before a DOE credit review committee before President  Obama is inaugurated. The committee, consisting of career civil servants  with financial expertise, remands the loan back to DOE “without  prejudice” because it wasn’t ready for conditional commitment.
March 2009: The same credit committee approves the  strengthened loan application. The deal passes on to DOE’s credit review  board. Career staff (not political appointees) within the DOE issue a  conditional commitment setting out terms for a guarantee.
June 2009: As more silicon production facilities  come online while demand for PV wavers due to the economic slowdown,  silicon prices start to drop. Meanwhile, the Chinese begin rapidly  scaling domestic manufacturing and set a path toward dramatic,  unforeseen cost reductions in PV. Between June of 2009 and August of  2011, PV prices drop more than 50%.
September 2009: Solyndra raises an additional $219  million. Shortly after, the DOE closes a $535 million loan guarantee  after six months of due diligence. This is the first loan guarantee  issued under the 1703 program. From application to closing, the process  took three years – not the 41 days that is sometimes reported.  OMB did  raise some concerns in August not about the loan itself but how the loan  should be “scored.”  OMB testified Wednesday that they were comfortable  with the final scoring.
January – June 2010: As the price of conventional  silicon-based PV continues to fall due to low silicon prices and a glut  of solar modules, investors and analysts start questioning Solyndra’s  ability to compete in the marketplace. Despite pulling its IPO (as  dozens of companies did in 2010), Solyndra raises an additional $175  million from investors.
November 2010: Solyndra closes an older  manufacturing facility and concentrates operations at Fab 2, the plant  funded by the $535 million loan guarantee. The Fab 2 plant is completed  that same month — on time and on budget — employing around 3,000  construction workers during the build-out, just as the DOE projected.
February 2011: Due to a liquidity crisis, investors  provide $75 million to help restructure the loan guarantee. The DOE  rightly assumed it was better to give Solyndra a fighting chance rather  than liquidate the company – which was a going concern – for market  value, which would have guaranteed significant losses.
March 2011: Republican Representatives complain that DOE funds are not being spent quickly enough.
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI):  “despite the Administration’s urgency and haste to pass the bill [the  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act] … billions of dollars have yet  to be spent.”
And House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Cliff  Stearns (R-FL): “The whole point of the Democrat’s stimulus bill was to  spend billions of dollars … most of the money still hasn’t been spent.”
June 2011: Average selling prices for solar modules drop to $1.50 a watt  and continue on a pathway to $1 a watt. Solyndra says it has cut costs  by 50%, but analysts worry how the company will compete with the  dramatic changes in conventional PV.
August 2011: DOE refuses to restructure the loan a second time.
September 2011: Solyndra closes its manufacturing  facility, lays off 1,100 workers and files for bankruptcy. The news is  touted as a failure of the Obama Administration and the loan guarantee  office. However, as of September 12, the DOE loan programs office closed or issued conditional commitments of $37.8 billion  to projects around the country. The $535 million loan is only 1.3% of  DOE’s loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that’s known to  be troubled.
Meanwhile, after complaining about stimulus funds moving too slowly, Congressmen Fred Upton and Cliff Stearns are now claiming  that the Administration was pushing funds out the door too quickly: “In  the rush to get stimulus cash out the door, despite repeated claims by  the Administration to the contrary, some bets were bad from the  beginning.”

What critics fail to mention is that the Solyndra deal is more than  three years old, started under the Bush Administration, which tried to  conditionally approve the loan right before Obama took office. Rather  than “pushing funds out the door too quickly,” the Obama Administration  restructured the original loan when it came into office to further  protect the taxpayers’ investment.

What actually happened, how it  could have been prevented and who's  responsible, are  these things are orthogonal to the battle  taking place  in political circles. That battle has nothing to do with the facts.

For a mix of financial and ideological reasons,  U.S. conservative movement  activists, operators, and politicos hate clean energy.  They don't believe in climate change, they love fossil fuels and  fossil-fuel campaign donations, and they think, or want the U.S. public  to think, that clean energy is weak, unreliable, marginal, and dependent  on government subsidies. They have been trying to make that case for a  long while.

What Solyndra gives them is  a symbol, something  to use as a stand-in to discredit not just the DOE loan program, but all government support for clean energy and indeed clean energy itself.

Cons understand post-truth politics.  They understand that  truth is utterly inert in an era when mainstream  institutions are viewed with hostility and skepticism, the media is  fractured, and there are no  shared norms or referees to enforce them.   The side that wins is the side that plays to its audience's existing  preconceptions with a simple message repeated over and over and over  again in multiple venues.

That's what is happening now around Solyndra. The right is going  after this whole hog, trying to make the name synonymous with clean  energy   boondoggle. And the left is flailing around, throwing out this  fact and that fact with no coherent message. Additionally, the right pretty much has a lock on the US media so that the message that this was yet another Obama and environmentalist failure is repeated over and over.

That works with the Low Information Voters who believe that global warming is a hoax, or in some way a disputed theory.  Unfortunately, they are the people who need to be reached with better information rather than fed more of the corporatocratic propaganda.

See also:

• Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story


• Solyndra is the next ‘Climategate’