Senator Reuven Carlyle – Channeling The 1950’s

Washington State Senator Reuven Carlyle started out yesterday’s hearing by attacking me for having a different opinion, criticizing NASA, making him uncomfortable and presenting “barely 1950’s era science.”  The Senator’s attack was rather remarkable, because he hadn’t heard my presentation yet. I’m not surprised Senator Carlyle is obsessed with the 1950’s, because that was the era of Senator Joe McCarthy – whom Democrats accuse of viciously attacking people for holding different beliefs.

NASA was created in the 1950’s, and their first accomplishment was the X-15 aircraft which flew at Mach 6.7. The early days of NASA was a time of great achievement. President Trump plans to make NASA great again.

The 1950’s was the decade when Dr. Edward Teller led the American effort to build a thermonuclear bomb. Dr Teller was one of more than 9,000 PhD scientists who signed the Global Warming Petition Project – to end the global warming scam which Senator Carlyle is pushing.

Global Warming Petition Project

The 1950’s was the era of President Eisenhower, who warned us about the military industrial complex, and the “danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Senator Carlyle has business interests in “green energy.”  Not surprising he is pushing this scam. What is surprising is that Democrats have become everything they claim to hate. Intolerant, non-inclusive and incredibly rude.

Washington State used to have one of the best governors in the country, Dr. Dixie Lee Ray was a top scientist who completely understood the global warming scam.

R&L: Could you describe the progress of environmentalism from its earlier days to the current radical, “Earth First!” type of activists? How did it so obviously drift so far to the left?

Ray: The only way that could have happened was for the misguided and false information, much of it very hysterical or dramatic, like the earth is warming and the ozone has a hole, and all that kind of thing— could not have lead to the passage of laws and regulations that affect everyone’s lives were it not for the cooperation of the press. It is the press that has taken these charges and accusations and blown them up without any kind of skepticism whatsoever—blown them into realities and treated them as if they were true. A simple example:

We have heard recently the charge that supposedly because of the chemical chlorofluoro-carbons that humans make for use as a refrigerant, that molecules of that substance get into the stratosphere, destroy the ozone, and therefore allow ultra-violet light to penetrate. We know that the greatest amount of flux in the ozone in the atmosphere is over the Antarctic, because the sun is down below the horizon during the Antarctic winter. This is background.

The charge is that the ozone is so destroyed that the amount of radiation coming through has caused cataracts in the wildlife—rabbits for example—and in the sheep in Patagonia, New Zealand, and so on. That was printed in the popular media without the reporters ever asking any questions about these so-called cataracts and the blindness.

Also, they were puzzled. They were able to contact some knowledgeable people in radiation, physicists who knew how much ultraviolet radiation was turning up near the South Pole and could not understand how that small amount of radiation could possibly cause cataracts. If it could, then seven out of ten people would be walking around with white canes.

Finally, one radio station in California, in Orange County, sent a reporter down to investigate. He went to Patagonia and saw that indeed many of the sheep and rabbits were blind. Not being a doctor, he didn’t know the cause of blindness but was able to get the eyeballs of some the animals who died and sent them to the medical research laboratory at the University of California. They found no cataracts whatsoever.

The sheep were going blind from an epidemic of pink eye, which is very common among certain types of wild animals and cattle. In fact, one of the best ways to treat pink-eye is a little exposure to ultraviolet light, which kills the yeast that causes it!

Reporters no longer ask for verification, thus they print charges no matter how outlandish they may seem, and once having done that, when the truth comes out, it’s buried in the back page or never makes it on the air at all.

Governor Dixie Lee Ray

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Senator Reuven Carlyle – Channeling The 1950’s

  1. Thomas Robbins says:

    Well you went into the belly of the beast – Washington State, Oregon, may as well anex with California, although I dare say Northern California’s would not be so happy about it. These idiots are so far gone…to imagine with your credentials vs. this bozo racketeer politician, that you had to endure such an insult before you even presented, is so ugly and unprofessional, but not surprising. It is indicative of their reactionary, mantra based, cult like agenda, hiding behind people who lack a 5th grade understanding of physics, thermodynamics, basic science facts..and lets not forget history! (Let’s face it, they would not understand the fact that correlation often causation, but often is just a tool for looking for other factors that could be involved – well except when its 99% of atmospheric c02 values vs. temp adjustments) . These are the types that rely on US TODAY for their science and graphs – I pick on USA TODAY as my statistics professor in college had us collect misleading statistical graphics in US media as our first assignment – I found a ton in USA TODAY. One of their favorite’s is to show the very top of a bar graph, which appears to show one variable much larger than the other, until you realize they are only showing you 5% of the graph. Now I would be able to find many in SA or Nat Geo. .. bravo for fighting the good fight..I am amazed at your ability to press on, and not overreact to the alarmists.

    • Robertv says:

      People like Senator Reuven Carlyle are just tools. You don’t want tools to be smart you want them to OBEY. The tool knows that the only way he can stay in ‘power’ / alive is to follow orders.

      • Squidly says:

        You nail it Robert .. Being born and raised in Washington, with my parents still living there, I fully understand their current legislature and political climate. They are all “tools” without two functioning synapse to rub together (combined).

        This is why I found it rather amazing that Tony would bother wasting his time in Washington. There is no way Tony is ever going to nudge a single molecule in that State. No chance whatsoever.

        One thing the killed Tony’s presentation pretty quickly with them, unfortunately is Tony’s own fault. While I agree with a lot of Tony’s political position, and love some of his political rant and calling out, you cannot say such things in social media and then present yourself to a State legislature like Washington’s. Unfortunately, because of Tony’s political positions and that he has made them public, he is no longer credible to such people, and they will pile these straw-men in his path wherever he goes. In States like Washington, Tony is never going to be able to overcome the bonfires from those straw-men. I’m sorry, it’s not right, but it is reality.

        I still maintain respect for Tony in that he has the nerve, drive and motivation to at least make the attempt. I cannot fault Tony for that, for sure.

      • Robertv says:

        They are all “tools” without two functioning synapse to rub together (combined).

        Ward planned to present a “necessity defense” to the courtroom, which basically holds that while he broke the law, he had to in order to prevent greater harm—that being climate change. However, the judge in the case, Michael E. Rickert, denied Ward’s request to present the defense, commenting that there was “tremendous controversy” over whether climate change even existed. As the Guardian reports, that comment was not well received by the climate activists closely monitoring the case.

    • Washington is where Olmstead and other government officials organized crime during Prohibition, and the resulting Supreme Court jurisprudence that still makes it OK to listen in on your phone calls comes from federal agencies trying to bust organized mischief lodged within Washington state and local government agencies.

    • Steve Parker says:

      “Well you went into the belly of the beast – Washington State, Oregon, may as well anex with California” <- Only the parts West of the Cascades. And even then, the rural areas of Western Oregon are still sane. If we could dump Portland and Eugene we'd be a Red state.

  2. Latitude says:

    Obviously this is wrong…
    …they couldn’t even read a thermometer

  3. Another deplorable says:

    “What is surprising is that Democrats have become everything they claim to hate. ”

    Actually they were there first …

    Bill Clinton Immigration State of the Union Address 1995 [on Borders & Immigration] & 2017 LIBERAL MELTDOWN

    President Clinton on Borders & Immigration (1996 SOU address, in case you didn’t get it in 1995)

    Trump the plagiarist! LOL

  4. Lynn Clark says:

    I watched the video of your presentation and followed along with your slides. A few observations:

    1) Carlyle did everything he could to avoid paying attention to what you were presenting.

    2) Most of what you presented — all the newspaper references — was of little value, and you provided so many of them so fast that it switched off any attention any of the listeners had. People can only take a firehose so much.

    3) You wasted valuable time going over your background twice. Shorten it down to about three sentences.

    Most non-technical, non-scientific minds have no idea how to interpret a graph. I think your presentations would be more effective if you slowed down a bit and took the time to explain what the graphs actually mean: what the numbers on the sides and bottom of the graph represent, their magnitude, where the data came from, how and why adjustments to data were made and why that’s good/bad/misleading, etc.

    Otherwise, nice effort, but I fear mostly wasted.

    • Squidly says:

      I agree Lynn.

      I believe Tony’s presentation could have been made much more powerful at only 1/4 the amount of time (if not less). For me, even being a very technical person (software architect/engineer, physicist), the most powerful parts of Tony’s data are 3 things … the blink graphs through the chronological progression of NASA’s temperature series changes, the graph showing the rate of data manipulation, and the amount of “fake” data used to create their temperature series (almost 50%).

      I believe with a proper focus on just those 3 items, one could create a 5 minute presentation that would be irrefutable. At that point, it would have been up to the legislators to attack it (as they did) with questions, at which point Tony could have buried them with additional details and facts, that again, would have been irrefutable.

      All Tony needs to drive this stuff home, is a 5 minute focus in the right places. There rest just becomes fluff and noise.

    • Squidly says:

      Oh, and I also agree about the “credentials” .. If it were me, I would simply state “I am an expert in this field, you can read my bio for my specific credentials” … and leave it at that. These kind of folks don’t give a rat’s rump what the credentials are of someone who disagrees with them. They couldn’t care less. Don’t present them with a potential target unnecessarily, they will already use all they can get.

      • These are good points. My stage elocution is not good, and Rudy’s is enough like mine to make me wince. I am trying to develop patter and rhythm modes but… slow going. The main thing most take for granted here is the vertical axis that is maybe a couple of degrees, with the graph function ranging like half a degree. Also the difference btwn temp and temp anomaly could stand a few words of context-formation. Still, better’n my presentations.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Lynn, I disagree:

      “2) Most of what you presented — all the newspaper references — was of little value, and you provided so many of them so fast that it switched off any attention any of the listeners had. People can only take a firehose so much.”
      This was absolutely necessary to counter the already established ClimAstrologist’s meme that there was no ‘Global Cooling scare’ in the late 1960s – 1970s. One or two articles were just not going to do it.

      Notice that the ‘no Global Cooling scare’ meme was not brought up because Tony had already killed it.

      “3) You wasted valuable time going over your background twice.”

      Again this was absolutely necessary. Carlyle tried the “You are not an expert therefore we do not need to listen to you” crap, but again it did not fly in the face of Tony’s overwhelmingly obvious expertise.

      “Most non-technical, non-scientific minds have no idea how to interpret a graph. I think your presentations would be more effective if you slowed down a bit and took the time to explain what the graphs actually mean”

      This does not need to be in the verbal presentation and instead can be in the information packet that was handed to each member of the committee. Also I would hope that these committee members are well enough educated that they can actually read a graph. (Although sometimes you wonder if they have IQs higher than a doormat.)

      I will agree that the significance of the r^2 = 98% (Pearson correlation coefficient) could have been explained better and hit harder, however Tony had a time constraint to deal with. Therefore this again could be handled in the packet given the committee members.

      Since I know something about statistics, that high of a correlation coefficient was a real revelation.

      • CheshireRed says:

        While there’s sense in ongoing media presentation skills the single biggest indicator of accurate science is the accuracy and credibility of evidence. Tony’s was all-but unimpeachable and I’ll bet Mr Carlyle doesn’t challenge any of it. Modern politics is far too much spin and presentational fluff which often is a diversion away from unwanted reality.

        Tony hit multiple bullseyes precisely because he showed the evidence exactly as it fell (which is seldom as slick as professional PR staff would want it) rather than fluffing it out to suit his agenda. There’s great strength in the brutality of truth and when it comes to AGW theory truth is on our side. It will out.

        • Gail Combs says:


          Over on ConservativeTreeHouse which is a political blog, I was pleasantly surprised at how knowledgeable the people there are about the CAGW scam.

          Nice to see actual indepth facts posted outside the science blogs in a more general forum.

  5. GeologyJim says:

    Reuven Carlyle is, based on hes behavior and statements, a bully and ignorant of the issue

    On the other hand, Joe McCarthy was right about Communists in the US government

    It is still true today

    • Colorado Wellington says:


      Joe McCarthy didn’t give a damn that people were “holding different beliefs”. He simply didn’t want Americans with allegiance to a hostile foreign power to hold position in the U.S. Government and especially its armed forces, intelligence apparatus and the State Department. He understood what damage Soviet agents in the OSS and elsewhere did to United States interests during the war and after.

      The Communists were ideologically and oath-bound to support the goals of the international Communist movement controlled by Stalin and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

      It is like not wanting jihadists with allegiance to Mohammed’s global quest for Islamist dominance to hold positions in the State Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies today.

      The very word McCarthyism was invented by NKVD and first published in the Communist Daily Worker. The Communists understood what threat McCarthy represented to their strategy and did everything they could to destroy him.

      Let’s not play their game.

      • David A says:

        ” It’s exactly like not wanting Jihadhists…”


        • Gail Combs says:

          What is really scary is bring the ‘Jihadhists’ into the USA was INTENTIONAL. Gee Thanks Senator Edward Killer Kennedy!

          CNN put out the complete LIE

          No person accepted to the United States as a refugee, Syrian or otherwise, has been implicated in a major fatal terrorist attack since the Refugee Act of 1980 set up systematic procedures for accepting refugees into the United States, according to an analysis of terrorism immigration risks by the Cato Institute.

          Oh Really? No Refugees implicated in terrorism? LIE much do we? (Note weasel word ‘major’)

          List of Foreign-Born Islamists Charged With or Convicted of Crimes in US “…Although Liberals continue to hold onto the idea that refugees from war-torn Syria pose no significant national security risk to the United States, the facts tell a different story. Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, has identified at least 26 instances in which foreign-born individuals inside the U.S. were charged with or convicted of terrorism in the last year or so….”

          22 Jun 2016 Senate Committee: 580 Terror Convictions in U.S. Since 9/11, 380 Terrorists Are Foreign-Born [71 were confirmed natural-born, and the remaining 129 are not known] Amazing how that never made it onto the front page of the Yellow Stream Media as the controversy over Trump’s moratorium exploded… No wonder Obummer and Hitlery would never spike of Islamic Terrorism.

          Just for the record. Islam/Sharia Law as a factor in the USA is rather new.

          Prior to 1965, and Killer Kennedy’s 1965 law, there were only 100,000 to 150,000 Muslims living in the United States. Now Pew Research estimates that there were about 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States in 2015. From 2001 to 2013, the decade AFTER 9/11 the U.S. admitted more than 1.5 million lawful permanent residents from majority Muslims nations to the U.S. Under Bush II, right after 9/11 the Immigrant Quota for Muslims DOUBLED! Yet we Americans were subjected to TSA and the Patriot Act because of Islamic Terrorism.

          Muslim Immigrants in the United States — 2002

          ….By the time of the landmark 1965 change in the immigration law, about 100,000 to 150,000 Muslims lived in the United States.

          That 1965 legislation imitated the third wave of immigration, which continues to the present. Opening the doors to immigrants from the entire world, it put a premium more on skills and family ties than on provenance. Indeed, with time, making the U.S. population more diverse became a goal in itself, as symbolized by the lotteries, starting in 1989, which gave a chance to anyone around the world to come to the United States with his immediate family.

          Accordingly, the numbers of Muslim immigrants began to increase rapidly starting in the late 1960s. Recent analysis completed by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that, among countries with large Muslim populations, Pakistan is by far the leading sending country of immigrants over the last decade, followed by Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Egypt….

          Islamists have particular importance, for they harbor religious and political ambitions that are in a potential collision course with the majority population.

          Islamists arrive in the United States despising the country and all it represents, intending to make converts, exploit the freedoms and rights granted them, and build a movement that will effect basic changes in the country’s way of life and its government. The superpower status of the United States makes it especially attractive to those who wish to change the world order; what better place to start? Islamists do not accept the United States as it is but want to change it into a majority Muslim country where the Qur’an replaces the Constitution. “Our plan is, we are going to conquer America,” is how a missionary put it already in the 1920s.4 His latter-day successors are no less ambitious. They have two alternate strategies, non-violent (i.e., conversion of the Christian majority) and violent (i.e., jihad), to accomplish this….

          They aspire to achieve four general goals:

          * Win special privileges for Islam (e.g., call for the creation of a White House Muslim advisory board);

          * Intimidate and silence the opponents of militant Islam (e.g., have death edicts brought down on them, as happened to co-author Khalid Durán);

          * Raise funds for, apologize for, and otherwise forward the cause of militant Islamic groups abroad, including those that engage in violence (e.g., the Holy Land Foundation, closed down for raising money “used to support the Hamas terror organization.”);17 and

          * Sanitize militant Islam (e.g., promote the notion that jihad is not warfare but a form of moral self-improvement).

          Which brings us to the subject of terrorism: Since the November 1990 assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane by an Egyptian, the immigrant Muslim community has been associated with a great number of violent incidents — all these even before the atrocities on September 11, 2001.18 In its long history of immigration, the United States has never encountered so violent-prone and radicalized a community as the Muslims who have arrived since 1965…..

          The more I learn the more Cold Anger I feel towards The 545 People Responsible For All Of U.S. Woes

          • Jason Calley says:

            That last link to “The 545 People…” is still a great article. Everyone should read it.

          • Gail Combs says:

            I post that link occasionally just to remind people that none of this is by chance. It is deliberate and there are 545 people directly responsible.

  6. TimboA says:

    Tony, you clearly hit those two jackasses where it really hurt. They didn’t hear a word you said and resorted to cheap theatrics and ad hominem attacks as their way of “debating”. Congratulations for your courageous efforts!!

  7. Ron Clutz says:

    Comments above mention a little about Washington state’s climatism, and there is much more to add, including the Ward valve-turner trial.

  8. C. Driscoll says:

    I thought the presentation was well done. As an “expert witness” he needs to have credibility to be relevant. He establishes (1) he is a highly trained scientist who’s life work is rooting our errors (2) he is actually an environmentalist (3) he receives no money from corporate or other interests.

    It is irrefutable that Gavin and Co. (1) have changed data over the years always warming the present and cooling the past; (2) use data that is not raw collected data, but interpolated data that is subject to whatever biases they want to use in their models that create “data”. I also appreciate that Mr. Heller throws in the newspaper articles. Although not “data,” the observations of the time support warming skepticism, and refute alarmism.

    I would love to see someone from NASA/NOAA go through this presentation and provide a reasoned scientific explanation/refutation, allowing Heller a rebuttal. But that is doubtful. However the refusal to debate gives even more credibility to Mr. Heller’s arguments.

    • stpaulchuck says:

      the $100,000 challenge still stands with zero takers
      also we need to get some more court cases that would allow discovery into the fake data issue (see the thread on fake hot spot in Africa for example)

    • David A says:

      I would like to know exactly what stations were used in the oldvreports showing the ice- age scare, and what stations are used now, and why. (also of course analyse how the common stations were adjusted for the newer data sets, and why different stations were either added, or removed.

      • Gail Combs says:

        David A
        You might want to ask the same question HERE:
        Of Missing Temperatures and Filled-in Data (Part 1)

        One of the most shocking things about examining the GHCN data that goes into global climate models has been the inconsistency of the data. Not only is there loss of stations, but within each set of station data, there may be considerable loss of monthly data. This post asks – how bad is this? (answer – much worse than I thought – see the last graph)…

        Of Missing Temperatures and Filled-in Data (Part 2)

        And here: My, What Big Datasets You Have, Grandma NASA

        • A C Osborn says:

          Gail, I just posted this over at Paul Homewood’s forum, but it should be one here and as many Forums as possible.
          It totally vindicates Tont regarding what they have been doing to the data.
          “Paul, sorry this is off topic.
          Over at Climate etc they have been discussing the Rose/Bates expose of the Karl Paper.
          At the bottom of the comments commenter Peter O’Neill has posted some tables about the Changes that have been made to the Irish Temp Raw Data by NASA/NOAA in their GCHN database.
          This could be a very big expose indeed.
          Nick Stokes is trying his best to down play it.

          I have also sent you an email regarding this, unfortunately I can’t ask any questions at Climate etc as I do not have any of the required input methods.”

          • Gail Combs says:

            I passed it on to E.M. Smith (ChiefIO) since he is currently looking at the next version of the data and climate models.

  9. Ross says:

    Slightly O/T but I read on the Drudge Report that “retiree” republicans Hank Paulson and James Baker are pushing for Carbon Tax at a meeting in DC. They obviously didn’t get the memo or they are like Carlyle with vested interests in a part of the renewables industry.

    • stpaulchuck says:

      it seems some big money people want to recreate the failed carbon exchange so they can skim off a few billion more

  10. toorightmate says:

    The good Senator would make a good running mate for Elizabeth Warren.

    Together they would win the world championship for “RUDENESS”.

  11. I remember Gov. Dixie. I believe she was supportive of The American Civil Defense Association, Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, Access to Energy and other causes unpopular in communo-fascist circles.
    Physics Today used to have a really good letters section back in the 80s and 90s. It is worth checking out how they are handling the current Gaian religion disinformation campaign to make electricity a felony.

  12. gregole says:


    I watched the vid and read the slides. You did a great job – thorough, detailed and I’d like to see the classless and clueless Carlyle disprove or “discredit” anything you said in your presentation.

  13. Harrison Bergeron says:

    That’s liberals for you–apologizing to their slaves for the existence of free speech.

    Round them all up, for god’s sake; they’ve committed crimes against humanity.

  14. stpaulchuck says:

    let’s see… a pol totally making up stuff about something he has never personally seen or read, the subject of which is about made up stuff. Seems about right.

  15. John F. Hultquist says:

    The State of WA has been ordered by a court to fully fund education. The teacher’s union sees money flowing freely in their direction. Democrats are very willing and see the climate thing as a way of getting the money they want to spend. Senator Carlyle lists “education” as one of the many things he is interested in. His district includes much of what you might think of as “downtown Seattle.” Best to avoid this area if at all possible.
    He seems to not have any training with respect to climate or meteorology, and is about as far from a class-act as one can get.
    I live on the east side of the Cascade Mountains and, of course, am about as classy as can be.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.