Glaciergate

A Climate chief was told of false glacier claims before Copenhagan acording to Ben Webster writing for the Times Online on January 30, 2010. The chairman of the leading climate change watchgod was informed that the claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit according to the Times. Rajendra Pachauri told that the IPCC (or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong. He waited 2 months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists. The IPCC's report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions. Dr. Pachuari played a leading role in the summit. It corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure. He told the Times on January 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. He said: “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my attention. There were statements, but we never looked at this 2035 number.” He denied of deliberately kept silent about the error to avoid embrassment at Copenhagen. Although, a prominent science jouranlist named Pallava Baglas (who writes for Science Journal) said that he asked Dr. Pachuari about the 2035 error last November. He said that Dr. Pachuari told him about the error that: "I don't have anything to add on glaciers." Most glaciologists believe that it would take many hundreds of years for it to melt because they are so thick and exist in such high atltiudes. Dr. Pachuari previously dismissed a report as voodo science from the Indian government saying that glaciers might not be melting as much as had been feared. Mr Bagla said he had informed Dr Pachauri that Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University and a leading glaciologist, had dismissed the 2035 date as being wrong by at least 300 years. Professor Cogley believed the IPCC had misread the date in a 1996 report which said the glaciers could melt significantly by 2350. Pallava interview Dr. Pachuari again for the Science magazine. He asked him why he had decided to overlook the error before the Copenhagen summit. Dr. Pachauri replied that he didn't overlook it to stabailize the Copenhagen meeting. The story broke in December 2009. Dr. Pacharui was accused of using the error to win grants worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. What is true is that glaciers melting in the Himalayan Mountains soon by 2035 has been debunked.

Wescott and Hort are famous figures in religious history. They are of course apostates of the faith. We know that God's Word is divinely inspired and inerrant. People wanted to destroy the Bible, but they won't be successful. The Bible is perserved in the Massoretic Text in the Old Testament and the Greek Textus Receptus for the New Testament. This text is from the Geneva Bible and the King James Version of the Bible were created from. The New Greek Text is what modern versions come form (like the Revised Version of 1881, the Jesuit Douay Catholic Bible of 1582, the pro-Jesuit New International version, and the New American Standard Version) which existed from a corrupted Greek Text. This new text comes from Vitcanus MS, the Sinaitic, the Latin Vulgate, and other scripts. The Oxford Movement was when Vatican/Jesuit agents tried to infiltrate & persecute the Protestant Movement in the United Kingdom during the 19th century. One of the leaders of this movement was Cardinal Wiseman. He wanted England to return under Roman control. He studied under Cardinal Mai, who was the editor of the Vatican manuscript. This Oxford Movement involved the famous figure of JOhn Henry Newman. He was a leader of Oxford University and was an Ecumenical Anglican clergyman. by 1845, he joined the Roman Catholic Church following another professor named Ward. About 150 clergyman and eniment laymen joined the Roman Catholic Church in that time. Wiseman said that the Jesuits inspired him to promote a textual critique. As early as 1816, the American Bible Society wanted a revision of the Bible. This group was financially aided by the British and French Bible Society of Lond, which have high level links with the United Grand LOdge of England. Frenton John Antony Hort was an Anglican clergyman and Brooke Foss Westcott was an Anglican clergyman. Hort, Westcott, and later Archbishop of Cantebury Edward White Benson created the Ghost Society (which became the Society for Psychical Research. All of these men were involved in the occult). In 1853, Westcott and Hort began to create a new Greek Text of the New Testament beyond just a revision. They hated the Textus Receptus. Really, they used Alexandrian corrupt manuscripts as an means to subplain the Textus Receptus, which undelines the Authorized Version. Constantin Tischendorf (1815-74) was a German textual editor, who discovered the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (which is based on the Westcott-Hort Greek Text). Tischendorf discovered (c. A.D. 1844) the Vaticanus B manuscript in the Vatican Library and Sinaiticus Aleph in a waste basket in a Catholic convent at the base of Mt. Sinai. Anglican clergyman and briliant textual scholar Dean John Burgon opposed the text of Wescott and Hort, because it had errors and distortions. Westcott and Hort used their text in order for the English Revised Version to be formed. Fenton John Anthony Hort's own words show that he supported Romish doctrines, he believed in Evolution, he denied the substitionally nature of Jesus Christ's salvation, he hated democracy. Westcott promoted spiritualism, he denied Heaven as being a place, etc. The Neslte/Aland New Greek text followed the Hort and Wescott New Greek Text.

Colorado and South Dakota have experienced the introduction of the Firearm Freedom Act in the place. It was introduced in both of the state's Senates. If passed, the bill would make state law that: "...any firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in the state and that remains within the borders of the state is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.” This makes the Firearm Freedom Acts already passed in Montana and Tennessee real. This bill is now introduced in 21 states by the names of: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. Gary Marbut is from the Montana Shooting Sports Association. He is the author of the original bill that was introduced in Montana. He said that it's likely that FFAs will be introduced soon in West Virginia, New Mexico, Idaho, Kansas, Arkansas, Louisian, North Carolina and elsewhere. South Dakota's Senate Bill 89 called SB89 was introduced by State Senator Rhoden, and has 22 Senate co-sponsors and 44 House co-conspors. The Colorado Senate Bill 092 or SB10-092 was introduced by State Senator Schulteis and has 9 Senate co-sponsors and 7 House co-sponsors. People know about nullificiation. Nullification is apart of American tradition about a state nuffilying federal law (or calling it void or inoperative). This nullification is done against a federal law requiring state action to prevent federal enforcement within the state. Madison and Webster wrote that nullification laws have the state government not only have the right to resist unconstitutional federal acts, but that, in order to protect liberty, they are “duty bound to interpose” or stand between the federal government and the people of the state. Some legislators in proposals have added misdemeanors to felony charges to federal agents if they over step their legal boundaries. Other legislators have already introduced what’s known as the “State Sovereignty and Federal Tax Funds Act” which would require the state to interpose against the IRS and withhold tax funds from D.C. Click here to read more about this proposal. Some believe that these acts are legitimate courses to take to enhance the seperation of powers in government.

Free Speech is important to protect. Some believe that a mall wants to restrict conversations about God. There are arguments that have moved to the apellate court level in a California case in which 2 willing strangers in a shopping mall was arrested because the subject of the conversation was about God. The case occured years ago. This was when a youth pastor was arrested at the Galleria Mall in Roseville, California. The reason was that he had a conversation about religion with 2 other people. Matthew Snatchko works with youth at his church was interrupted in the middle of a conversation by a security guard. A second guard joined the confrontation and told Snatchko that he was being placed under citizen's arrest for "trespassing." The pastor agreed to leave. Although, later, the guards grabbed him, roughly shoved him against a storefront window, and handcuffed him tightly enought to draw blood. Snatchko was taken to the police station where he was booked on charges of battery and trespassing. The charges were dropped a short time later. Although, officials with the Pacific Justice Institute decided to pursue a case against the mall over the impact of the policy on free speech. Placer County Superior Judge in 2008 affirmed the mall's regulations. Later, an appeal was launched to the 3rd Appellate District in Sacramento and the briefs have just now been completed for that court's review. "It's surprising that mall owners think they can arrest patrons for engaging in casual conservations," said PJI Staff Attorney Matthew McReynolds. "While a 'don't talk to strangers' rule may be good for kids, enforcing it against adults is absurd, and we think it violates California's free speech guarantees." The case is being pursued under the state's constitutional provision for free speech, which extends protections to private locations. The reason is that the 1st Amendment to the Constitutions deals directly with government restrictions. McReynolds said that had the case been argued in federal court, it would have have had to focus on the discriminatory nature of the mall's restrictions. "Singling out religious speech for punishment violates our most basic principles of free expression," said PJI President Brad Dacus. "If anyone can be arrested for wearing a Christian T-shirt or mentioning God in a shopping mall, we have lost not only our freedom, but our sanity as a society." PJI affiliate attorney Timothy Smith is of the Sacramento firm McKinley and Smith. He served pro bono as Snatchko's lead counsel in the trial court and continues to serve as part of the appellate team. McReynolds told WND the case focuses on the draconian limits set by the mall that were used to arrest the youth pastor. Even when the charges were dropped, the case wasn't court-adjudicated precedent that could be used to protect others. Limiting volume according to McReynolds is fine, but not targeting religious speech for banishment. According to McReynolds, oral arguments haven't been scheduled to the court in the case and there's no time frame available yet for when a decision might be reached. PJI's brief to the court explained the issues. The court believed that the pastor spoke without a permit on a specific message. The mall's regulations, besides disallowing commercial speech and speech about religion or politics, also include an exception for those subjects if a speaker knew the other person previously. "Under the exemption, the plaintiff would have been allowed to have the same conversation in the same exact place if only he had previously met the people with whom he was speaking," the brief challenged. "The notion that an individual is not allowed to speak with a stranger about a non-commercial topic without first having their speech examined is preposterous, and is truly silencing in every sense of the word," the brief said. The mall's rules require a submission of the subject matter of the spoken or written speech according to the brief. The bried mentions that: "...Defendants' licensing process as a whole has a great deal to do with speakers' message. Not only does the application process require an examination of the subject matter, but plaintiff was actually referred to the licensing application process only after the security guard listened to the content of plaintiff's speech." Westfield Group is the corporation that owns the mall. The company's website says it entered the U.S. market in 1977 by purchasing a single shopping center and today has 55 centers all over America. Their key markets are in southern Florida, LA, New Jersey, northern California, Chicago, San Deigo, and Washington. The Westfield Groups is the world's largest listed retail property group by equity market capitalization. Pacific Justice said Snatchko was originally confronted during a casaul converstiaon with 2 other shoppers about faith. A store employee listened to the converstation and alerted mall security guards. The ban on conversations with strangers about religion or politics is fascists anyway. The mall bans any clothing with religious or political messages, which is also fascist. Fascism agaisnt free speech continues in America. We should never be a docile slave to the state, but free thinking human beings in God's Earth.

People are now attacking pregnancy centers. Abortion advocates can't produce a real scandal. Olympia was the palce where the Senate committee on Health and Long Term care held a hearing on SB 6452 which seeks to regulate crisis pregnancy centers in a variety of unnecessary and unconditional ways. The bill is being promoted by Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Rights Advocacy League or NARAL. This would place many regulations on crisis pregnancy centers that wouldn't aplly to centers that offer abortion. This is very unconstitutional. The hearing allows people to hear the lies about crisis pregnancy centers that simply must be stopped. One Planned Parenthood employee said that she was told that: "the HIV virus goes through a condom like rice through a tennis racket." The doctor testified that condoms which when used every time, they are 70% successful in preventing HIV. So, 3 out of 10 people can possibly get HIV if exposed. Another Planned Parenthood employee said that she was told that sexual activity was going to lead to depression, STD's, and possibly even drug and alcohol abuse. Another Planned Parenthood employee came into a crisis pregnancy center under false pretenses (for the reason of making a documentary). She explained the results of her pregnancy test were not given according to her until she had been asked to watch an outdated movie. She claimed that it scared her, even though she is "an informed young women." She summarized it this way: "The underlying message of the video is that teen sexual activity leads to death, suicide, and depression and that you are bound to get an STD even if you wear a condom." Another star witness and doctor from the University of Washington testified that centers have been telling patients that abortion will give you an increased risk of cancer. She doesn't believe in the risk and that the science is settled. Thsi is contrary to the fact. Later in the hearing, Sen. Cheryl Pflug informed the committee that in 2009 a study by the National Cancer Institute and the Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center found that an abortion increased your risk of cancer between 20% and 50%. There was nothing in the hearing that was scandalous against crisis pregnancy centers. The facts ought to be known about sex, STDs, and abortion. Yet, even even the Washington State legislature Governments should monitor public health issues. So, the crisis pregnancy have doing to a great job in helping women. So, accurate information ought to made known to people and at the same time organization spending time plus resources sending medical services, counseling, and support to women in need is ok as well. Abortion is murder like always.

By Timothy