Climate Change – Can We Adapt?

Posted on June 1, 2014 by Tony Heller

I’ve been around for almost 60 years, and the climate is just like it was 60 years ago.

It is cold and snowy in the winter, and hot in the summer. We have tornadoes in the spring and summer, and hurricanes in the summer and fall. Nothing has changed.

Sometimes it floods, sometimes it is dry. Climate change is a huge, mindless mass delusion, and always has been.

ScreenHunter_232 Jun. 01 11.30

10 Jan 1871 – IMAGINARY CHANGES OF CLIMATE. (Pall Mall Gazette.)

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Climate Change – Can We Adapt?

  1. gator69 says:
    June 1, 2014 at 4:08 pm

    It’s the ‘CHANGE’ to which my liberties cannot adapt that is an actual threat , and worthy of public concern. Climate changes yearly, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly, and certainly.

    Reply
  2. Bob Knows says:
    June 1, 2014 at 4:36 pm

    In 1871 they were only about half a century out of the “little ice age” or medieval cold period. No, climate hadn’t changed in his lifetime, but it had changed some in his grandfather’s lifetime. It had warmed up a bunch going into the 19th century. With us now having only 2 sunspots we are obviously beginning another conld time. Don’t know how long it will last nor how cold it will get. It has nothing to do with human activity.

    Reply
  3. Andy DC says:
    June 1, 2014 at 5:25 pm

    We may not be able to adapt if these alarmist’s draconian taxes/regulations are enforced and the country is pushed into a depression as a result.

    Reply
    • gibleonzim says:
      June 1, 2014 at 7:33 pm

      Andy, please relax! The depression we just experienced was created by the Bush administration and the present President, he of good common sense, who looks out for you (the fortunate) and the unfortunate…has brought the country to better times. Please be aware of who was just leaving office when the architecture he created sent the country into the toilet. You can also thank W for all the lives (ours and Iraq’s) lost in Iraq….please try to be upset by the oil companies, the banks and the insurance companies that do not pay taxes….and, though they hate the word socialism. take the government’s money (yours and mine) and fly it home in their private planes…the criticism of Obama doesn’t just hint at racism…it screams racism…again, look at your achievements and look at his…..give the man a break!

      Reply
      • Stark Dickflüssig says:
        June 1, 2014 at 9:15 pm

        Number of times Andy DC mentions the name Obama in his text: 0

        Try again.

        Reply
      • Colorado Wellington says:
        June 1, 2014 at 11:29 pm

        gibleonzim:

        It was explained repeatedly in the Party classes on Internet work that while you can—and must—use one of the predefined texts in your responses, you also must read the bourgeois adversary’s post and pick an appropriate rebuttal that relates to it. Yours is an undisciplined post that doesn’t advance the cause of the proletariat. There are hundreds of texts blaming the Bush administration in your manual.

        You need to study harder! Shake off your petite bourgeois individualism and develop a collective conscience. You don’t represent yourself—your words belong to the Party!

        Reply
        • Gail Combs says:
          June 2, 2014 at 12:19 am

          After AIG was fed millions upon millions of tax payer dollars that were then funneled to the banks, Bernanki added insult to injury by DOUBLING the money supply which in effect halved your wages and halved your savings.

          Clinton also signed NAFTA and the World Trade Organization treaties. (Bush Sr. was pushing them but Clinton sold them to Congress.) On top of that Clinton handed the Chinese our technology so we do not even have the technological advantage to keep jobs in America. SEE Chasing the Dragon: Clinton’s China Policy

          Again long story short those treaties keep the USA from protecting US jobs by using tariffs (import taxes) This means American Labor is now competing with Chinese labor.

          As of 1 May 2013, the highest monthly minimum wage in China is 1,600 yuan ($265.64 US Dollar/ month) or $1.66/hr. The lowest minimum wage was 1,010 yuan ( $165.62 US Dollar) that is $1.035/hr . US minimum wage is ~$1250/month @ $7.25/hr. That is what American workers are competing against.

          Obama raising the minimum wage just sends more jobs overseas. You want jobs back then lower the wage to $1.00/hr cut all the regulations and build nuclear plants as fast as you can. The other option is get the heck out of WTO and impose import duties that level the playing field again.

          OH and do not forget the H1B visas that allow low wage technical workers from India and China to take what used to be high paying tech jobs from Americans. Ask any one in the computer field and they will tell you the tech departments are now filled with Indians and Chinese that they had to train before they were fired.

      • Gail Combs says:
        June 2, 2014 at 12:04 am

        The current Depression was created by BILL CLINTON!
        The problem was the five new banking laws Clinton signed.

        BANKING LAWS:
        The McFadden Act of 1927 or Amendment to the National Banking Laws and the Federal Reserve Act (P.L. 69-639, 44 STAT. 1224): Prohibited interstate banking.

        Law: Negating above:
        Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994         (P.L. 103-328, 108 STAT. 2338).
        Permits bank holding companies to acquire banks in any state one year Beginning June 1, 1997, allows interstate mergers.

        The Glass-Steagall Act or Banking Act of 1933 (P.L. 73-66, 48 STAT. 162): Separated commercial banking from investment banking, establishing them as separate lines of commerce.

        Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (P.L. 84-511, 70 STAT. 133): Prohibited bank holding companies headquartered in one state from acquiring a bank in another state.

        Law: Negating both of the above laws:
        Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999         (P.L. 106-102, 113 STAT 1338)
        Repeals last vestiges of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. Modifies portions of the Bank Holding Company Act to allow affiliations between banks and insurance underwriters. Law creates a new financial holding company authorized to engage in: underwriting and selling insurance and securities, conducting both commercial and merchant banking, investing in and developing real estate and other “complimentary activities.”

        Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-242, 105 STAT. 2236).
        Also known as FDICIA. FDICIA [b]greatly increased the powers and authority of the FDIC. Major provisions recapitalized the Bank Insurance Fund and [b]allowed the FDIC to strengthen the fund by borrowing from the Treasury.

        Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550, 106 STAT. 3672).

        RTC Completion Act[/b] (P.L. 103-204, 107 STAT. 2369):
        implement provisions designed to improve the agency’s record in providing business opportunities to minorities and women.. Expands the existing affordable housing programs of the RTC and the FDIC by broadening the potential affordable housing stock of the two agencies.
        Increases the statute of limitations on RTC civil lawsuits. In cases in which the statute of limitations has expired, claims can be revived for fraud and intentional misconduct resulting in unjust enrichment or substantial loss to the thrift.

        —->>The Source was (wwwDOT)fdic(DOT) gov/regulations/laws/important/index.html which was removed from the internet during foreclosuregate. and has now been replaced with (wwwDOT)fdic(DOT)gov/regulations/laws/important/

        Those are the changes in banking laws that set the stage.

        Here are the crucial move:
        1.CDSs, credit default swaps were exempted from regulation in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in the year 2000.

        2.Hank Paulson was the Treasury secretary who engineered the AIG bailout. He worked for Goldman Sachs.

        3. If a bank had the credit default swap insurance policies on a mortgage, especially if they had more than one, it was to their advantage to force foreclosure.

        4. Obama mortgage program sets up homeowners for defaulting on their mortgage by reducing payments up front before qualification. The bank then stalled making a decision for a year by asking for different paperwork. They then handing homeowners a staggering bill, due in one month when they do not qualify. If the homeowners could meet the bill the banks then refused to name an actual amount due. (First hand experience. Took 6 months and a lawyer to nail bank down.)

        Senior investors, who are typically financial institutions, own the AAA tranches that are insured against default by AIG, and they WANT to foreclose on the Middle Class so that insurance payments kick in. Conversely, the junior tranche investors want workouts with homeowners because their investment is not insured.

        “To ensure that the mortgage servicer pushes default instead of workout, the servicer is paid double (50 basis points versus 25 basis points) by the MBS to service a loan in default. Why do you think your servicer tells you that you must be in default before it will consider a mortgage modification, a practice known as invited default?

        “Simply put,” says Parker, “the government bailout of AIG has actually encouraged foreclosures because the taxpayers continue to fill AIG’s coffers with enough cash to pay out insurance on defaulted home loans.”

        “A credit default swap (CDS) is a credit derivative contract between two counterparties,” says Wikipedia. “The buyer makes periodic payments to the seller, and in return receives a payoff if an underlying financial instrument defaults. CDS contracts have been compared with insurance, because the buyer pays a premium and, in return, receives a sum of money if one of the specified events occur…

        Instead of cars or houses, credit default swaps were used to guarantee mortgage-backed securities (MBS), a safe bet according to the best-available mathematical models. Why? Because most homeowners pay off their home loans with the certainty of an ATM.
        The is no reserve requirement with CDS because there’s no government regulation. Each insurance company can set aside as much — or as little — as it wants for reserves. In fact, a company could set aside nothing for potential losses without violating regulatory requirements.
        The money NOT set aside for reserves can be invested in high-risk securities to create a larger cash flow for the insurance company. This means that with CDS, insurers expected not only premiums but also bigger investment returns then would be possible with regular insurance products.
        CDS premium revenue is not restricted to those who might have actual losses or real assets to protect. You can bet as much as you want and create as many CDS as you want….
        http://www.realtytrac.com/content/news-and-opinion/how-the-aig-bailout-could-be-driving-more-foreclosures-4861

        In other words there maybe more than one CDS on a mortgage and therefore it is much more profitable to collect the multiple payoffs than to refinance the mortgage.

        Reply
        • gibleonzim says:
          June 2, 2014 at 3:45 am

          Gobbledegook….the country is far better off under Obama than it was under Bush and he doesn’t have thousands of American lives on his conscience because of a lie…wake up!

      • Gail Combs says:
        June 2, 2014 at 12:54 am

        To hide the fact that US jobs were being exported Clinton changed the unemployment reporting system. This hid the fact the USA now has an unemployment of ~24%

        “GOVERNMENT ECONOMIC REPORTS: THINGS YOU’VE
        SUSPECTED BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK!”
        …Up until the Clinton administration, a discouraged worker was one who was willing, able and ready to work but had given up looking because there were no jobs to be had. The Clinton administration dismissed to the non-reporting netherworld about five million discouraged workers who had been so categorized for more than a year. As of July 2004, the less-than-a-year discouraged workers total 504,000. Adding in the netherworld takes the unemployment rate up to about 12.5%.

        The Clinton administration also reduced monthly household sampling from 60,000 to about 50,000, eliminating significant surveying in the inner cities. Despite claims of corrective statistical adjustments, reported unemployment among people of color declined sharply, and the piggybacked poverty survey showed a remarkable reversal in decades of worsening poverty trends.

        Somehow, the Clinton administration successfully set into motion reestablishing the full 60,000 survey for the benefit of the current Bush administration’s monthly household survey….

        The republicans are not blameless either.

        For example Reagan allowed the hostile takeovers and leveraged buyouts that saw the raping of well run midsize American corporations.

        ….The leveraged buyout boom of the 1980s was conceived by a number of corporate financiers, most notably Jerome Kohlberg, Jr. and later his protégé Henry Kravis. Working for Bear Stearns at the time, Kohlberg and Kravis, along with Kravis’ cousin George Roberts, began a series of what they described as “bootstrap” …investments… WIKI

        (Notice the PROPERTY used for COLLATERAL of these loans was NOT owned by the Corporate Raiders)

        …..Both economic and regulatory factors combined to spur the explosion in large takeovers and, in turn, large LBOs. The three regulatory factors were the Reagan administration’s relatively laissez-faire policies on antitrust and securities laws, which allowed mergers the government would have challenged in earlier years; the 1982 Supreme Court decision striking down state antitakeover laws (which were resurrected with great effectiveness in the late eighties); and deregulation of many industries, which prompted restructurings and mergers. The main economic factor was the development of the original-issue high-yield debt instrument. The so-called “junk bond” innovation, pioneered by Michael Milken of Drexel Burnham, provided many hostile bidders and LBO firms with the enormous amounts of capital needed to finance multi-billion-dollar deals….
        http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/TakeoversandLeveragedBuyouts.html

        So what did the US government do about this highly unethical practices?

        ..In January 1982, former US Secretary of the Treasury William Simon and a group of investors acquired Gibson Greetings, a producer of greeting cards, for $80 million, of which only $1 million was rumored to have been contributed by the investors. By mid-1983, just sixteen months after the original deal, Gibson completed a $290 million IPO and Simon made approximately $66 million.[9] [b]The success of the Gibson Greetings investment attracted the attention of the wider media to the nascent boom in leveraged buyouts.[/b][10] Between 1979 and 1989, it was estimated that there were over 2,000 leveraged buyouts valued in excess of $250 billion…..
        WIKI

        A US Secretary of the Treasury started the sellout of our economy. Reagan through his laissez faire attitude did nothing to stop it.

        …Both economic and regulatory factors combined to spur the explosion in large takeovers and, in turn, large LBOs. The three regulatory factors were the Reagan administration’s relatively laissez-faire policies on antitrust and securities laws, which allowed mergers the government would have challenged in earlier years; the 1982 Supreme Court decision striking down state antitakeover laws (which were resurrected with great effectiveness in the late eighties); and deregulation of many industries, which prompted restructurings and mergers. The main economic factor was the development of the original-issue high-yield debt instrument. The so-called “junk bond” innovation, pioneered by Michael Milken of Drexel Burnham, provided many hostile bidders and LBO firms with the enormous amounts of capital needed to finance multi-billion-dollar deals….(wwwDOT)econlib.org/library/Enc1/TakeoversandLeveragedBuyouts.html

        Without intervention greed took over.

        Corporate takeovers became a prominent feature of the American business landscape during the seventies and eighties. A hostile takeover usually involves a public tender offer—a public offer of a specific price, usually at a substantial premium over the prevailing market price, good for a limited period, for a substantial percentage of the target firm’s stock. Unlike a merger, which requires the approval of the target firm’s board of directors as well as voting approval of the stockholders, a tender offer can provide voting control to the bidding firm without the approval of the target’s management and directors…..

        Because it allows bidders to seek control directly from shareholders—by going “over the heads” of target management—the tender offer is the most powerful weapon available to the hostile bidder. … Although hostile bidders still need a formal merger to gain total control of the target’s assets, this is easily accomplished once the bidder has purchased a majority of voting stock.
        (wwwDOT)econlib.org/library/Enc1/TakeoversandLeveragedBuyouts.html

        the result of the 1980’s leveraged buyout feeding frenzy.

        Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980’s were hostile. The 1980’s also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.’s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988…

        THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers…. In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America….

        THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another’s.

        Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages….
        January 29, 1989 (wwwDOT)nytimes.com/1989/01/29/magazine/leveraged-buyouts-american-pays-the-price.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all New York Times

        Raidors took completely debt free companies like Gillette (as in razor blades) and saddle the company with crippling debt. Other companies were literally dismantled and the equipment sent overseas. The wealth of America, our factories and industry has been quietly sold off piece by piece. For the industries with over 50% foreign ownership, see Source Watch http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Foreign_ownership_of_U.S._corporations

        Statistics (courtesy of Bridgewater) showed in 1990,before WTO was ratified, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002 this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP. (wwwDOT)fame.org/HTM/greg%20Pickup%201%2010%2003%20report.htm

        As a too little too late move.

        In the 1980s during the great takeover boom and hollowing out of the industrial heartland, many states adopted amendments to their corporate codes that codified directors’ fiduciary duties, so-called “constituency statutes”. In general, these provisions made it clear that a director need not “maximize shareholder value.” Rather, in complying with their fiduciary obligations, directors may take all sorts of things into consideration – the impact of their decisions on various constituencies, including employees, the community, the environment, the color of the sky, whatever…

        When these statutes were first passed, they were heralded as way to protect jobs, etc….

        My problem with these statutes is that they strike me as a bit of a head fake…..

        lawprofessors(DOT)typepad.com/mergers/state_takeover_laws/

        Reply
        • gofer says:
          June 3, 2014 at 4:58 am

          Motorola, Google co, is closing its only U.S. mobile phone plant in Texas and moving development to Brazil and China because of wages.

      • Jl says:
        June 2, 2014 at 1:40 am

        “Thank W for the lives lost in Iraq…” Really? 29 of 50 Democrat (58%) Senators voted for the war, while 82 out of 209 (40%) Democratic Representatives voted for the war. “Oil companies, banks and insurance companies that do not pay taxes.” Data, please.

        Reply
        • gibleonzim says:
          June 3, 2014 at 6:38 pm

          They voted for the war because of the big lie….where have you been…..demonize the right guy…I’ll work on finding the data…however, do you recall the government bailing out banks, insurance companies….and oil companies….and the incredulity of the American people…when the executives of these large companies continued to receive bonus money in the millions….each….call it what you want…the word the GOP hates …socialism….or the more realistic term …theft…several years ago…it was in the news that five of the largest corporations in the U.S. ….paid -0- taxes. Two of them were Exxon and Bank of America…

        • gator69 says:
          June 3, 2014 at 7:50 pm

          What is it like living in a fact free world gibberism?

          Last year ExxonMobil paid $31 billion in federal income tax, and in 2011…

          “In 2011 the three oil giants mentioned above paid more income tax than any other American corporation. ExxonMobil paid $27.3 billion in income tax, Chevron paid $17 billion, and ConocoPhillips paid $10.6 billion.”

          http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/How-much-Tax-does-Big-Oil-Actually-Pay.html

          You will never learn anything if you get all your ‘facts’ from leftists, except maybe that leftists are dirt bags.

      • Ernest Bush says:
        June 2, 2014 at 7:29 am

        After reading your comment below I’ve decided you are in the pay of the government or an idiot.. All of our presidents since Reagan have been big government proggressives.

        Reply
      • Gail Combs says:
        June 3, 2014 at 7:38 pm

        SIGHHHhhhh.
        The present depression was NOT created by Bush. It was KNOWINGLY created by Clinton as I posted and you read.

        The fact you are still pushing that lie means you are either completely closed minded or hope to be one of the elite masters in the future “Socialist Utopia”

        Hate to tell you. The top dogs have a real nasty habit of killing of their willing accomplices once their usefulness is up.

        Actually the ‘Socialists’ just like to kill period. As Fabian Socialist George Bernard Shaw showed in his stained glass window ‘Socialists” are nothing more than Wolves in a sheepskin and Dr. R.J. Rummel proved it in his studies DEMOCIDE: DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

        Perhaps you are not so closed minded that you will not read Dr.Rummel’s words:

        After eight-years and almost daily reading and recording of men, women, and children by the tens of millions being tortured or beaten to death, hung, shot, and buried alive, burned or starved to death, stabbed or chopped into pieces, and murdered in all the other ways creative and imaginative human beings can devise, I have never been so happy to conclude a project. I have not found it easy to read time and time again about the horrors innocent people have been forced to suffer. What has kept me at this was the belief, as preliminary research seemed to suggest, that there was a positive solution to all this killing and a clear course of political action and policy to end it. And the results verify this. The problem is Power. The solution is democracy. The course of action is to foster freedom.

        THAT IS THE TRUE FACE OF YOUR ‘SOCIALISM’

        (I can’t stand Bush or Shrub either but learn to get your facts straight and nail them with what they were responsible for.)

        Reply
  4. annieoakley says:
    June 1, 2014 at 6:04 pm

    OT but this is the latest EPA water grab. The only article I can find is from the ‘Durango Herald’ but at least the paper calls it a water grab. The EPA will eventually turn our water rights over to the UN because that is the goal here. Farm ponds, irrigation water and the Clean Water Act is being used to justify the taking.

    Tipton

    In March, the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed a rule to define what “waters of the United States” fall under federal jurisdiction. The rule would include smaller bodies of water including streams, riverbanks, wetlands and floodplains that may have access to larger bodies of water.

    Reply
  5. John B., M.D. says:
    June 1, 2014 at 7:00 pm

    Steve – Same in Chicago. We get abupt climate change twice per year (2 seasons – winter and road construction). Somehow, we survive. But financially, IL just kicked the can down the road again. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-05-31/news/ct-illinois-legislature-met-0601-20140601_1_rauner-new-illinois-budget-hole We may not survive that.

    Reply
  6. Colorado Wellington says:
    June 1, 2014 at 8:37 pm

    The climate has changed some from 60 years ago.

    Back then American Progressives believed that the Soviet Union will soon win over the United States and they proudly called themselves Communists. Later they hijacked another word and renamed themselves Liberals but still put their hopes for the future in Moscow (and Havana, Hanoi and Bejing). Then the Soviet Union lost the Cold War and they said they knew all along it can’t work that way because social justice has to be done differently. Then they renamed themselves Progressives.

    Reply
  7. care says:
    August 27, 2014 at 10:18 pm

    I think climate change baloney is to cover up the mess they are making with both chemtrails and haarp, to the earths climate.. I read several article about the ability of the military to control the weather. There was a statement by a general in the military in the 1940’s that I read stating they were going to be able to control the entire planets weather in just a few years. Apparently those few years are now. Apparently they can do things like stack and disburse cloud formations as well. It’s frightening! The Geoengineeringwatch.org has more information.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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