The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets - Category [Editorial]
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.


Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in securities or firms mentioned and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. Pitch emails missing the above will be silently deleted. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2020-05-18 06:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 582 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

The only difference between rape and sex is consent.

It's quite clear that the screwing that has been going on since March, as defined by the people of this nation, can only be described as sex as I can't find even a single digit percentage of Americans who refuse consent.

Let's cut the crap.

Since the end of March it has been obvious that there was exactly zero evidence for any sort of "lockdown" of any business or person save one -- nursing homes.

I've been pointing it out.  Trump had a point with the original "15 days" simply because we didn't know where we were.  I had a working hypothesis with regard to the actual "R", methods of spread, their comparable efficacy and similar, all derived from the data available.  It was also obvious in the beginning and middle of March that ventilators were not an answer and thus attempting to build lots of them was stupid at best -- and homicidal at worst.

Even in March we had good reason to believe we were not on the cusp of a disaster.  Events such as Diamond Princess provided extremely strong evidence of this; that we were either much further along with infections than we thought we were or there was some sort of cross-immunity or resistance to this bug.

The person making extraordinary claims (2.2 million Americans will die) has the burden of proof, and the more-extraordinary the claim the higher the burden.

May I point out that while "2.2 million Americans will die" sounds apocalyptic it in fact isn't?  2.7 million, more or less, Americans die every single year.  It's normal.  The question isn't whether someone will die; it is of what will they die.  Not "with" what -- of what.

There's plenty of evidence of not only fraud but intentional causation of death during this alleged "pandemic."  Colorado has walked back roughly 15% of their claimed deaths after being caught claiming that someone who literally drank themselves to death died of Covid-19.  No, Covid-19 did not cause the person with a 0.55 BAC level to expire.  But it took exposition of fraud at that level of outrage for the State to 'fess up and reclassify those who were falsely spiking the numbers back out -- and we don't even know, because there's no independent auditing going on, whether they in fact took them all back out.

Then there are the ten states where nursing home deaths are half or more of all deaths.  Nursing homes are state regulated institutions.  The States, in several cases including New York, issued regulations forcing these institutions to accept people who were Covid-19 positive, effectively seeding the equivalent of smallpox into those facilities on purpose.  We knew very early on that if you had one of a relatively-short list of maladies you were much more likely to have a severe case of this disease and by definition anyone in a nursing home is seriously compromised in their physical health.  We have thrown people in prison for manslaughter on far less provocation that what these governors have done -- and with good cause.  Where are the prosecutions and why have the citizens of New York, along with other states, allowed their governors to kill Grandma without an immediate uprising?

Next up is the claim was that these lockdowns and other restrictions were to "flatten the curve" and prevent hospital overloads.  Most people would accept that if it was true.  But it was never true especially when you take the intentionally-caused serious cases out of the system.  New York was one of the few places with an actual hospital overload but in New York Cuomo's order on nursing homes caused roughly half the deaths and without them there would have been no overload at all.

But the most-damning evidence of all comes out of the unbroken series of serology tests along with coroner's reports (including out of NYC) that prove that for those without one of a list of underlying conditions your risk of a bad outcome is very close to zero -- and well below that of all-cause mortality.  To be blunt you're more-likely as an infant to die of SIDS than Coronavirus.  Never mind the personal choices people make that increase their risk, particularly obesity.  Would you lock down the entire nation and destroy its economy because some people choose to smoke or drink to excess, and as a result are more-subject to lethal disease?

That's what we've been doing!

To be blunt: So-called social distancing is a flat-out crock of shit.

What's even more outrageous is to claim a "public health emergency" exists when you ride down the street in an armored truck shooting people, explicitly targeting those who are fat and thus it would pose more difficulty in treating their wounds, yet that is exactly what Governor Cuomo -- and others -- did.  These governors roughly doubled the fatality count from Covid-19 through their own intentional acts with full knowledge of the danger they were putting the victims under.

In any just society that would lead to instantaneous federal indictment under 18 USC 242 with said person being arrested and thrown in the dock immediately -- and no prayer in Hell of being bonded out. Indeed the entire point of the federal government claiming a right to enforce Civil Rights at the state level arose out of exactly this sort of disparate harm intentionally aimed at certain parts of the population.  Since when does being black give you special rights that someone who is also part of a distinguishable part of the population -- specifically, being old and frail -- does not have?

May I point out the penalties clause for 18 USC 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

I'll take Guillotines for $100, Alex.

Then there are the nasty set of facts on this virus to begin with.  Those who have severe or critical cases are much more likely to be deficient in Vitamin D, for example.  Vitamin D is found in fatty fish such as salmon with small amounts also found in other animal products such as beef liver, cheese and egg yolks.  It is also generated by your body as a consequence of sun exposure.  That is, locking people into their homes directly injures them in terms of their personal risk of a severe outcome from this disease and despite the screaming Karens those Spring Breakers who flooded the beaches of Florida were actually engaged in behavior that was partially protective.  Isn't it interesting that despite all the claims that we'd have spring breakers dropping like flies the actual count of cases traced to that numbered...... wait for it..... five?

Who has been taken out, put in the stocks and pelted with rotten tomatoes for their vilification of young people, inherently at less risk to start with, engaging in behavior that we now know is actually protective?

Of course doctors and other "medically minded" people killing people through malfeasance and misfeasance is not new.  Such as my article from 2014 on UK doctors killing 80,000 people a year over a decade's timewhich I remind you is far more than have succumbed to The Roma in the UK.  Did we lock down for that?  Did the UK impose house arrest or other "restrictions" on the population?

Do you think this is an isolated incident?  May I remind you that upwards of 100,000 people a year are killed in the United States by nosocomial infections -- that is, infections acquired in a hospital!  That's more than the number of people felled by The Roma thus far and it happens in the US every single year.  Every one of those deaths is not only a homicide it's a negligent homicide too; exactly zero of them are unavoidable.  The medical industry put the name "nosocomial" on them so as to evade ordinary people calling it what it is and parading it on the TV: Negligent homicide.

Where is the chyron at the bottom of CNN, Faux Snoox and everywhere else listing the number of people killed every day by hospitals and doctors through their refusal to practice reasonable infection control?  If Covid-19 is a "public health emergency" why hasn't this been a continuing public health emergency and subject to the same sort of "mitigation" for the previous 20+ years when it kills an equal number of Americans not once -- but every year without fail!

As expected there are the screams of racism! coming from people because of a skew in the death numbers toward black and brown people.  So viruses are racist eh?  Nice try.  The truth is something entirely different: Lifestyle choices made by people have an outsized impact on the course of this disease -- specifically, the Pie Hole virus frequently precedes, by decades of willful personal action, a fatal outcome for Covid-19 exactly as it does for smoking and lung cancer.

Take both the willful and intentional actions of governors along with personal choice out of the mix as causative factors for serious, critical and fatal outcomes and suddenly this bug is an epidemiological annoyance.

Now let's add in 1968.  In 1968/69 H3N2 swept the globe; it was extremely contagious and troops returning home after the Vietnam War brought it rapidly into the United States, where it killed about 100,000 people.  There were about 200 million people in the US at the time, so adjusting for population this would put the death toll at about 150,000 today.

This is almost-directly comparable in terms of the rate of death seen with Covid-19 and yet exactly zero lockdowns were put in place and the economy was not impaired.  In addition, unlike Covid-19 but in line with most influenza strains that virus also killed a lot of infants and very young children.

And if that's not enough the prognostications of doom for those places that have reopened have been universally false.  The last leg of the stool on which these "lockdowns" rested was that if we did reopen the economy on a mass basis people would die en-masse.  But now we have the facts on that as well; it simply hasn't happened in any measurable way at all and that destroys the last argument for not immediately and completely removing all of the constraints.

China lied about this current virus in many respects, including its fatality rate.  But we've lapped up many of those lies as Americans and the so-called mainstream media has amplified them along with governors on both sides of the aisle.  There are exactly zero governors who have lifted all constraints and told people the truth: We were lied to, we were wrong and our actions, in light of the facts which we now know, were unsupportable.  This bug is nasty if you are medically impaired however we can lock in nursing homes and by doing so there is little risk of overload of the medical system, never mind that since hospitals are ill-equipped to deal with infectious disease generally the correct model for those infected is a sanitarium, which we will put in place for the duration should we have problems with this or a similar disease in the future.

Busing patients to such a place (and back when they're recovered) is dirt cheap compared to shutting down the economy.  Paying the caregivers in such places a  very significant bonus as compensation for being "locked in" for the duration or until they seroconvert and no longer can transmit the infection is dirt cheap by comparison as well.  Rent and line up RVs in the parking lot if you have to.

But instead we have a nation where half the people are screaming Karens parading around in masks claiming that "we're all gonna die" from the Roma if we are not literally imprisoned in our homes while the other half spends so much on kneepads as to run and everyone else out of them. The reason for their purchases?  To hide the use of their man-pleaser on our President's schlong on a daily basis; without those kneepads said acts would be evidenced by bare, white bone sticking out of the front of their knees.

Meanwhile our economy is dying.  A huge percentage, perhaps one in four or more, small businesses that were forced closed will never reopen.  Those are the firms that employ a quarter of America.  They're also how Americans have risen from being a wage slave to financial and personal independence from all walks of life irrespective of their race, color, religion or family wealth over the entire time this nation has existed.  Destroying these people through no fault or poor decision-making of their own is an outrage literally beyond words and more than sufficient cause for the people of this nation to start penning a second edition of The Declaration of Independence.

There are many who think the Federal Government can simply "spend" to make this up.  Nope.  That will inevitably be reflected back into prices and already is happening in the grocery store.  The full impact won't be felt for a couple of years and once again those at the lower end of the income ladder will take the worst of it simply because they lack the disposable income to deal with a 20, 30 or 50% increase in the cost of certain necessities.  That's financial sex; it's not rape because, once again, you continue to consent on a daily basis instead of dragging the people responsible out of their offices by their hair.

And oh, by the way, the "masks" worn by our so-called "leaders" have been caught on multiple occasions already as nothing more than theater; as soon as they think the cameras are turned off they all immediately take the masks off.  So much for believing what they're saying in public and even ordering you to do as a matter of alleged "law."

There is zero reason for anyone, irrespective of their political leanings, to consent to any element of our federal, state and local governments at this point.  I remind you that even a low single-digit percentage of those who actively refuse and are willing to back up that refusal with whatever is necessary to enforce same is sufficient to stop all of this bullshit in one afternoon as they would outnumber every law enforcement agency in the nation by a factor of 10:1.

There are those who claim this is all a "Get Trump!" conspiracy.  For those individuals please identify the Red State that has told all the screaming Karens to go screw a goat and has dropped all the constraints -- every one of them.  Those running that bullshit are lying; The fact is that both sides of the aisle are literally orgasmic over the power they're exerting and the screwing they are imposing on the populationespecially those on the lower end of the income scale.

Leaving aside the economic damage intentionally inflicted on our nation under false pretense, the majority of which has fallen on those making less than $50,000 a year -- the ordinary working stiff -- with exactly zero having fallen thus far on federal employees and lawmakers, every single one of whom is drawing their regular salary, along with the criminal malfeasance among governors who screwed up their alleged "unemployment" systems such that those people are not getting that which they paid into as insurance premiums, the rank violations of the basic Constitutional Freedom to go where we wish, when we wish and with whom we wish under intentional false pretense is plenty of reason standing alone for the people of this nation to refuse to consent to the continued existence of the government at all levels -- federal, state and local.

This intentional criminal malfeasance by governors has included freeing persons in jail and prisons. In at least two cases, one in Blue Colorado and a second in Red Florida these freed persons, one a convict and the second being held awaiting trial said individuals now stand accused of murder -- acts they would not have been able to commit but for their release.

If you drive someone to a bank knowing they are of criminal mind and they rob said bank you get charged.  Where are the criminal charges of accessory to murder for the governors and other jurisdictions involved in these releases when said persons were of knowing criminal mind -- trivially proved since they were already in jail!

Ask yourself this: If you're not going to rise and put a stop to the grave insult served upon our Constitutional freedoms at this level, deliberately aimed at the 70% of private sector workers on the lower end of the scale while exempting from those same consequences every single lawmaker, politician and enforcer irrespective of political party or affiliation then exactly when and under what circumstance would you so rise -- and why should anyone bother so much as lifting a finger to push buttons on a keyboard, say much anything else, in furtherance of defending your alleged "freedom"?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2020-04-15 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 258 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Folks, this tinfoil garbage just won't quit.

Look, I get it -- people love to find something to blame, and "oh, it was a bioweapon" is one of the common ones going around, along with "it's triggered by 5g!" (which is just flat-out horsecrap.)

The problem with bioweapons is that they're doomsday devices in that they have a 100% chance of scoring an "own goal."  To prevent this you must first have a vaccine with 100% coverage on your side so your people don't get the bug, and that vaccine must have permanent immunity.

Let me repeat this for you just in case your IQ is smaller than your shoe size: There has never been a successful attempt to prevent the spread of a virus beyond some arbitrary line on a map.  Ever.  Even in the days of old before international commerce and easy air travel it never worked.

Second, if you were going to create a viral weapon the last thing you'd use is a coronavirus.  Why?  Because despite decades of trying there has never been a successful, durable vaccine for a coronavirus either, so the odds of scoring such an "own goal" are in fact 100%.

Coronaviruses not only infect people they infect animals.  We have tried to create vaccines for animal husbandry and pet purposes on multiple occasions, and have failed every time to obtain permanent immunity.  We have also wound up creating amplification effects by accident too; the poster child for this one was a feline "vaccine" that actually wound up amplifying the effects of the virus instead of attenuating or preventing infections!  This is why, by the way, that there is no reason whatsoever to believe we will ever have a permanent vaccine; despite attempts in both animals and humans we've never succeeded before with this particular type of virus.

Now is it entirely possible -- even probable -- that this specific virus was an accidental release?  Yep.  In fact I'd say it's more likely than not.  That's the "civil standard of proof", and it's present.  Why?  Because this virus behaves like an attenuated live virus, but not attenuated enough.  For those who think that sort of idea is crazy I remind you that we've used that exact concept for decades with oral polio, and it works.  So the theory that this was an accidental release from Wuhan's lab and they were working on a vaccine for SARS, for example, is not crazy.  The only crazy part is that their odds of success were near zero in the first instance, but scientists try to find breakthroughs in things that appear to have a near-zero probability of success all the time.

But a bioweapon?  Nope.  There are plenty of candidate virus families to use for that sort of thing, if you're into attempting it. 

Coronavirus isn't one of them.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2020-04-14 15:24 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 409 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

The data continues to come in and is clear.

Not only are the hospitalization requirements from nursing home and other "skilled care" institutions for elderly people ridiculously over-represented (in every state where I have found detailed information by forty to fifty times or more their percentage of the population at-large) but they are also ridiculously over-represented when it comes to deaths, usually by the same percentages.

Without these deaths and hospitalizations and deaths, in fact this disease would be of no special concern at all.  Oh certainly, it would kill some people -- but by no means would it rate as a serious public health threat worthy of closing the entire economy and causing an economic depression.

It wasn't originally either, by the way -- this hasn't changed.  "Mitigations" will not change if you will get the virus; that has been admitted since this began.  They only change when you get the virus.  If it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you.

So the plan should have been, and we the people should accept nothing other, than the following on an immediate basis -- under pain of whatever we have to do to enforce it.

1. All skilled nursing home and other similar facilities are locked in.  This includes staff; if there is insufficient housing then rent some RVs or other trailers, stick them in the parking lot, and there you go.  Nobody comes in or leaves unless they have a positive antibody test and a negative PCR test, demonstrating they cannot transmit the virus.  Any staff member who refuses is summarily fired and, if they are a licensed individual, their license is revoked.  Deliveries are made to the curb of the facility with zero contact between such persons and the staff.  Period.

2. Any person who can demonstrate immunity may enter upon and leave said facility as they wish; this includes visitors, workmen and others.  No other person, except in the case of documented emergency (e.g. plumbing malfunction,  emergency transport of a resident to a hospital, etc) may do so and any person who must for emergency reasons must be screened on-site for the virus before being allowed in the building.  If this is impractical (e.g. EMS workers) then the entire path on which they travel and any location where they or any of their equipment goes must be immediately sanitized upon their departure by a person who is antibody-positive.

3. A person (e.g. resident) who leaves may not return until and unless there is a 14-day quarantine facility on site with completely separate airhandling and no physical interconnection or they test positive for antibodies, documenting that they do not have a latent infection that can become transmissible.

Everyone else goes back to work and all constraints otherwise are dropped.

If we had done this at the outset we would have saved roughly half the lives lost thus far and more than half the hospitalizations.  There would have been zero justification for locking down anything.  Likewise, there is no justification for doing so now.

People in this circumstance account for approximately 1/2% of the population of the nation.  We are being collectively punished to "protect" these people and not only are we failing to do so, as they're dying at ridiculously outsized rates, in addition collective punishment when one has committed no offense is both blatantly unconstitutional and a proper casus belli.

Again, there is no particular problem with hospital capacity absent these individuals and, in addition the mitigation measures not only cannot prevent you from getting the virus they were never claimed to be able to either; the entire justification for them was to avoid overloading the hospitals.

Well, that's how you accomplish that -- and any politician who is empowered to drop the constraints and doesn't must be immediately ejected from their office and our economy restarted now.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2019-07-24 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 1351 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

When someone runs a pack of lies intended to commit theft of trillions while allowing brigands to go free and steal, you should force them from office.

If they refuse to leave then the people should contemplate whether their government continues to enjoy consent of the governed.

And if that contemplation leads the people to the conclusion that it does not, then said government is dissolved.  It may leave in peace or may leave otherwise but the people have every right to compel it to leave.

This is the foundation of America.  You cannot believe that America is a valid nation, with a valid government, and not adhere to all of the above.  If you do then you're Hitler, Mao, or Pol Pot.  You have no more right to continue to be in said government than they did while they were murdering millions.

Thus, I give you Sanders:

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., on Tuesday compared the push to combat climate change to the response to the attack on Pearl Harbor as he unveiled legislation that would declare a “climate emergency" and demand a massive-scale mobilization to tackle it.

“In some ways...I’m reminded today in terms of the crisis that we face in climate change about where the United States was in 1941 when it was attacked at Pearl Harbor, and what happened at that point, having to fight a war on two fronts in the East and in Europe, the United States came together and within three years it had created the type of armaments program that was necessary to, in fact, win the war,” he said in a conference call with reporters.

This is a lie in all respects.

It is intended to steal trillions from United States citizens.

It is intended to enrich other nations at the expense of said citizens.

It is intended to enslave.

And under the 13th Amendment, it is unlawful, it is unconstitutional, and those who adhere to it must be forced to leave.  Here, now, today, and by any means necessary.

I submit the following facts, which cannot be disputed.

  • Human activity is responsible for approximately 3% of CO2 in the atmosphere.

  • Humans are not harmed, nor are any animals, by CO2 levels even more than double that in the atmosphere today.  In fact, the average CO2 level in an American home is twice that of the outside air.  This is simply due to the fact that we limit air exchange with the outside on purpose for energy efficiency reasons, and humans (along with pets) emit CO2.

  • During The Medieval Warm Period, roughly 900-1300 AD, global temperatures were approximately 1-1.5 degrees Centigrade higher than they are now.  There were exactly ZERO SUVs, coal-fired power plants and similar on the planet at the time.  The Vikings explored Greenland at the time and gave that land mass it's name, cultivating both crops and domestic animal food sources including horses, cattle, pigs, sheep and goats.  More than six hundred farms have been found and excavated on Greenland, proving that this was the case.  Post-1300 or thereabouts when the Little Ice Age began these all became non-viable and were abandoned.  I note that the Medieval Warm Period not only did not end the planet from an ecological basis it was thriving, as demonstrated by said civilizations, during that time.

  • During the Maunder Minimum, part of the Little Ice Age, the River Thames froze.  We know this happened because there are paintings, among other historical records, created at that time (~1660) which survive today.

  • Temperatures today are well below the maximum set during The Medieval Warm Period; we have exited The Little Ice Age and the planet is naturally warming.  For exactly how long that will continue cannot be determined but it is important to note that the Earth is currently in an interglacial period, which will eventually (long after everyone currently alive is dead) end.  When it does the planet will cool dramatically, as it has many times through the millennia.

  • This is not the only such anomaly during the time of recorded history.  The Romans enjoyed a similar warm period right around the time of Christ.  Perhaps not coincidentally, a cool period coincided with Roman collapse.  One does not have to wonder why that would have completely hosed the Romans.

  • Climategate exposed an enormous amount of intentional fraud on the part of those promoting the "Global Warming" nonsense, along with their intentional destruction of their claimed original source data.  This is, today, long-documented truth.

There is a long history of scientific fraud associated with various "environmental causes", many of which brought political changes predicated on lies that were directly responsible for massive numbers of deaths.  Here are two of these, one resulting in deaths and one not:

  • During the period from the early 1940s to roughly 1975 there was a great deal of concern that the planet was entering another Little Ice Age.  TIME Magazine wrote stories and ran covers about the planet almost-literally freezing over.  This is just one of many scaremongering games politicians and so-called "scientists" have run on the subject of climate and other ecological "disasters."  AOC is not old enough to have been alive when this occurred, but I was and remember it well.  Scientific "consensus" was that we were facing imminent disaster.  Of course the truth, now known. is that we never were, as it never happened.

  • So-called "scientists" also claimed, with much fanfare and universal consensus, that DDT was responsible for the thinning of eggshells among various bird species and, if the substance was not immediately banned, would lead to the destruction of all aviary species and ultimately the planet.  This screamfest culminated in the book Silent Spring by Rachel Carson.  It was all a fraud.  This is not my assertion, it is that of multiple PhDs, including published articles by same.  The resulting ban on DDT, undertaken by our EPA who knew they were lying, had overstated human exposures from the environment by a factor of 1,000 and never corrected the record, along with other governments worldwide who also went along with the fraudliterally killed millions in the ensuing years by allowing malaria, which had been seriously curtailed by mosquito abatement using DDT, to rebound.  This single fraud, all based on alleged "scientific consensus", killed more people than the entire Holocaust; the people who ran that crap managed for many years to rack up between a million and two million deaths annuallyNot one politician or so-called "scientist" was ever held to account for what was one of the largest genocides ever perpetrated on the human race with nearly all of the victims being brown or black. 

Next up we have the inconvenient fact that with humans being responsible for approximately 3% of all CO2 in the atmosphere (the rest is natural) even if we wanted to we could not drive the climate sufficiently to do damage via CO2 emission.

It's simply impossible from a standpoint of physics.  Approximately 2% of all gases in the atmosphere have an absorption spectrum that renders them involved in the so-called "greenhouse effect."  Of that CO2 is only about 3.5% of the total.  In fact nearly all of the gas that is involved in absorption and radiation of solar energy is water vapor.

Never mind that CO2 isn't a "pollutant."  Find anything green in your home or outside and look at it.  About 50% of what you see was once CO2.

CO2 is in fact scarce on a historical planetary basis.  It has been this low only once before for any length of time in the planet's history -- about 300 million years ago.

Further, and very damning, the so-called "measurements" used to make the claim of increasing CO2 levels "in the modern area" are also a scam.  They were cherry-picked; a look at a scatter graph of actual measurements and applying a best-fit curve shows that levels were near 500ppm in the early 1800s, long before we drove SUVs and burned coal or natural gas for electrical power.  This fact is, of course, conveniently omitted and yet this data is public.

It is certainly true that CO2 levels are higher now than they were 50 years ago.  This is good, not bad, in that it feeds plant growth.

This is beneficial, not dangerous.

Now here's the other problem with the base claim: "Human CO2 rise is causing warming."

From early 1900 to roughly mid-century the Earth was warming and CO2 levels were going up modestly.  Since then CO2 levels have risen at roughly three times that rate but temperatures have not gone up faster than they were before.  The rate of increase has not changed even thought he alleged "driving" factor has roughly tripled in impact.

There is no correlation and therefore the claim is, on a scientific basis, false.

Remember: Correlation cannot prove causation -- it can only suggest that it might be true -- but a lack of correlation disproves causation.

Why is the correlation missing if CO2 in fact captures photons, which we know to be true, and thus can cause warming?

Physics tells us why.  CO2, like all gases, has an absorption spectrum.  That is, it only absorbs certain wavelengths of energy.  The problem is that there are only so many photons of energy at that spectra emitted from the Sun that strike the Earth's atmosphere; once you've absorbed them all more CO2 in the atmosphere doesn't do anything to make the planet warmer because there are no more photons of the appropriate spectrum to be absorbed.

This is physics and those are laws, called such because there is no way to violate them.

Finally, none of the so-called "climate models" of the last 20 years have verified.  The expected rise in temperatures did not happen.

An inconvenient truth: We don't have enough carbon-based fuels on the planet to drive planetary CO2 levels even to the level inside your house.  Long before we got there we'd run out of economically-extractable fuel sources and be forced to use something else.  But government doesn't have to do anything to accomplish this; basic economics will do it all on its own as the cost of extraction rises since we continue to burn up the easier to get at, and cheaper, sources first.

Now let's look at what does correlate -- Ecliptic and Elliptical orbital variation and sunspots.  In fact, if you overlay those three factors on the actual temperature record for the last thousand years you find near-perfect correlation.

Does CO2 "cause" warming?  There's no evidence for it and the lack of correlation in fact disproves it.  In addition physics and thermodynamics argue against it as well.  There is no evidence to support the claim and plenty of evidence to support, on a correlation basis, that natural orbital, cosmic ray and sunspot activity is responsible, none of which, obviously, has anything to do with the number of SUVs being driven or whether we use coal and oil for fuel.

Now let's tackle one final claim: In 12 years -- just over a decade -- we're all dead if we don't stop emitting CO2.

That's so laughable that it should result in an immediate hanging for anyone running that crap in a political context.  Why?  Because through most of the Earth's history CO2 levels were dramatically higher than they are now and far beyond the so-called "runaway" level being pontificated.

If such a "runaway" was going to occur it would have happened millions of years ago and killed everything on this rock -- we would not be here.

This is a fanciful lie at the level of open and outrageous fraud; nobody should be able to run that crap and evade prison or worse.

Oh by the way, before I leave this specific part of the topic, let me make a further observation: After the Soviet Union fell suddenly "measured" temperatures started to shoot up.  Want to know why?  A large number of on-Earth temperature stations were in the former Soviet Union.  The Soviet Government, being Communist, paid for fuel at outposts based on the reported temperature; thus, there was a strong incentive to lie and under-report temperatures, especially in the winter.  Most of those stations went offline when the USSR fell but those that did not suddenly and magically started reporting true temperatures which instantly were materially warmer -- a literal impossibility since no time had passed.  The so-called "climate scientists" know this but have not removed that data as knowingly invalid -- on purpose.  In addition surface observations are naturally concentrated where there are people -- which biases the numbers upward due to well-known "heat island" effects (e.g. masses of concrete, blacktop, a thermometer in proximity to an A/C condenser, etc.)  All of this means the error band is wider than the signal (~2 degrees C, typically) and is majority biased one way -- upward.

In other words surface observation data is worthless since there's no possible way to accurately correct the historical data. 

We do have, however, for the last 40 years or so, high-quality satellite data.  It shows the same slope as prior to the 20th century; in other words yes, it is getting warmer -- but increased human emissions of CO2 is not the cause as the rate of change has not increased.

So let's put this in perspective: Will the planet likely be about a degree Celsius warmer in 2100 than around 2000ish?

Probably.  Unless we're entering into a solar minimum -- which we might be -- and if we are, you're going be rather surprised at the temperature deviation starting in the next 10-20 years or so because it's not going to be upward!

Are we the cause of any of this, and if we were to cut CO2 emissions would we stop it?



There's one final point.  Let's assume all of the above is wrong; humans are the cause of global warming, it's going to get a lot hotter in the next 100 years, well over 2 degrees Celsius, and we all need to cut all greenhouse gas emissions dramatically to stop it.

Then you have a further problem because the very scientists who claim we have 12 years to stop this also state that even if the United States cut its CO2 output to zero tomorrow that we'd manage to prevent...... a few tenths of a degree of increase in temperature.

Doing so, of course, would mean:

  • All coal, oil, and natural gas electrical generation is immediately shut downWe cannot supply the nation's electrical needs without these sources at anything approaching commercially-reasonable costs.  Solar + wind + batteries would triple or more the cost of electrical power.  This would take the $200 electrical bill in the southern states and make it $600 a month, or close to $7,000 a year.  The median family could not pay that under any set of conditions.

  • ALL air travel of any sort is immediately and permanently barred. There is no way to operate an aircraft without fossil fuels; it is simply a matter of energy density.  This means no Air Force, no Naval Aviators, no civilian air travel and no Air Force One.  Delta, American, United, Southwest, Fed-EX and UPS would all be instantly and permanently grounded.  Overseas travel and trade would effectively and permanently end.  Every person currently employed in any such job would be immediately and permanently unemployed.

  • ALL current oil and natural gas heating in homes and business must be shut down and removed.  The retrofit costs to electrical system (e.g. Heat pumps) would be enormous and in areas where temperatures go below freezing heat pumps do not work during that time because the outside coil both cannot pick up enough heat and it freezes.  Since fossil fuels, including wood burning, would be prohibited the only option would be electric resistance heating which is three to five TIMES as expensive.  $500 monthly heating bills anyone?  Who can afford that in the Northern states?

  • ALL current farm tractors and similar cannot be used and must be destroyed.  Farm output would instantly collapse.  We can easily feed the United States today; this would no longer be true.  Our agricultural output would fall by at least 80%.  But, it wouldn't matter because.....

  • All trucks, currently operated by diesel fuel, and all internal-combustion cars would be permanently banned.  Even if you had food on a farm 300 miles from the city you couldn't get it to the city and everyone inside said city would starve.

  • All ships and our Navy, along with our Air Force, would have to be be permanently scrapped.  The only remaining vessels allowed would be either nuclear powered in the case of naval vessels or sailboats.  Anything too small for nuclear plant couldn't exist at all.  No landing craft, destroyers, frigates, etc. There would be no point to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier since there would be no aircraft.  We wouldn't have to worry about trade with China, India, Pakistan or Vietnam since there'd be no way to get anything here.  All recreational watercraft, from jetskis to the largest yachts, would have to be scrapped and all businesses making those and their components would have to be shut down.  Even a pleasure sailboat would be illegal as they all have auxiliary internal combustion engines which could not be sold, used or fueled, nor could a generator be used.

  • Personal transportation beyond the range of single-charge return distance (about 300 miles) would become impossible.  Today you can drive north of 1,000 miles in a day, in your own car.  The best of battery technology, both today and on the horizon, limits you to about 300 miles with no reserve, and a multi-hour charge requirement before you can continue.  This makes your effective ability to personally travel less than one third of today's limit on a daily basis, and you can't decide to get on a plane or train to get around that either because, as noted above, all planes are banned.  Oh, and said "electric cars" would cost twice what fuel on a per-mile basis costs today.  You not only couldn't afford the Tesla you couldn't afford to plug it in to charge it.  Oh, and as for RVs?  Forget it.  Banned.

  • Emergency personal generators are immediately and permanently banned.  Was there just a hurricane, tornado or ice storm and your power is out?  Too bad, so sad.  In the winter your pipes freeze since you can't use auxiliary heat.

  • Re-configuring trains to be all-electric, since diesel fuel is now banned, would take a decade and outrageously increase the cost of rail transport.  There is no feasible way to do this, especially in areas where there is sparse or no electrical infrastructure today.

  • Mass-transit?  Forget it.  Buses?  What are you going to run them on?  Can't use natural gas or diesel.  Now what?

  • Re-configuring personal transportation, not including commercial transport (e.g. trucks, etc) to all-electric would require an approximate tripling of the electrical infrastructure in the United States.  We have no possible way to do so today even with an all-on, decade-long effort using fossil fuels.  It is flatly impossible to provide this level of electrical output using "renewable" energy sources such as wind and solar.

  • Solar, in particular, requires an enormous amount of energy and CO2 release to make the cells; there is no free lunch. You must put the energy in that you wish to later extract.  Since we cannot release any CO2 we also can't make any solar cells.  Sorry, there are no more solar cells.

  • You also can't make wind turbines.  Refining rare earth metals vital to their production requires energy.  The amount of energy returned by said windmill goes negative in this paradigm and thus it makes no sense to build windmills either as the energy to produce the windmill and operate exceeds that which is returned.

  • Finally, renewables such as wind and solar are intermittent; you thus need storage of some sort.  This means batteries or some form or potential or kinetic physical storage.  All require energy to be expended to manufacture and maintain them.  The energy balance of such a scheme is ridiculously unfavorable and, in the case of batteries the environmental damage associated with manufacturing and, in the case of lithium-based cells which cannot be economically recycled, their disposal, is severe.

It just gets worse from here; the bottom line is that a 100% CO2 cessation in the US (or "net zero", which forces capture at additional cost for any CO2 emitted) would instantly collapse the economy and kill an enormous percentage of the population -- likely two thirds or more of those here in America today -- by starvation.  It would ruin our cities by making mass-transit impossible beyond the immediate vicinity of subway stations.  It would also effectively delete our military.

Such a threat to cut CO2 emissions by humans in America, other than by breathing, to zero is a declaration of intent to commit genocide against the American people.  If there's a crime worthy of summary execution, that's it.

Even worse, doing this would accomplish nothing.  Why?  Because the US is not even on the map when it comes to the nations with the largest increases in CO2 production -- both here and into the indefinite future.  If you actually want to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere you must focus on, and enforce, cessation of emissions in those places where that growth is occurring.

In order to to that what you're actually saying is that we must destroy both India and China along with their entire population right now, and in addition we must also make clear that all other nations, from Vietnam to the Congo, may not develop middle-class lifestyles and advance the comfort and security of their people ever or we will destroy them as well as soon as they begin to do so.


Because India and China are by far adding the most CO2 to the atmosphere.  In fact the United States is roughly net-neutral at the moment (we were net negative a couple of years ago, and net positive last year.) Among other things while most people in the US and Europe already have air conditioners, which are a huge driver of electrical consumption almost none of the people there do.  The count of households and commercial enterprises there utterly dwarfs the United States and the rest of the Western World.  They will not stop advancing whether we like it or not unless we are willing to kill them all -- period.  Nor will Vietnam or, as time goes by the majority of the African continent.

As the global warming alarmist "scientists" admiteven if we cut our CO2 emissions to zero (not net zero, actual zero) it would make no difference in the outcome on a percentage basis.  Therefore the "cut America to zero" does nothing; the only path to achieve their "goal" is to commit genocide on a mass basis against the people of the world to the tune of billions murdered.

The climate screamers know this as well.

In short it's all a fraud just like DDT was and the people pushing it know it -- except that this time they intend to kill tens or even hundreds of times as many people as they did with the DDT scam.

This is another attempted genocide, just as the ban on DDT was, and must be stopped by whatever means are necessary.

The politicians pushing this crap must be ordered to abandon it by the people of the United States, as those who they represent.

If they refuse they must be removed from office.

If that fails then our only remaining choices are being slaughtered by financial ruin, murdered literally by starvation and inability to transport food and basic needs from the much-diminished production capacity to where they're needed, or we overthrow all governments involved in this scam by whatever means are necessary.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

Category thumbnail

It showed up in your mailbox, on your TeeVee, in your political ads.

It was cute.  It looked a bit like a rodent, a viper or a dragon.

But it was cute and cuddly.  It had forlorn eyes that gazed at you oh-so-lovingly.

It snuggled with you at night.

It just wanted a bit of food, a bit of warmth, a bit of comfort.

You couldn't leave it outside to freeze to death and die in the wintertime, or to be eaten by a hawk in the summer.

So you took it in.

You nurtured it.

You fed it.

You kept it warm at night.

You even let it sleep with you.

It will be ok, you assured yourself.

But it was indeed a monster, and it did what all monsters do.

It grew.

It got bigger, and stronger.

At first the little bite off your plate was no big deal.  But a while later you realized it was consuming a decent amount of your food.  Your budget increased to support it.  After all, it was cute and cuddly, and you liked it.

It was hot when you were cold, and cold when you were hot.  More was spent on A/C or heat which you didn't want or need, but it did.  After all, it was cute and cuddly, and you liked it.

Eventually it got big enough that those formerly-forlorn eyes looked menacing.  You didn't dare kick it out of your bed, or your home.  Now you were afraid; if you did throw it out, it could get back in by force.  It might be able to kill you in your sleep.

More months and years went by.  Now it's consuming enough food and other resource that it's no longer cute at all.  You're foregoing your own nutrition.  You're only showering once a week because it's using so much water you can barely afford the bill.  Your power bill is crippling you.  Your homeowners insurance company, knowing you have a dangerous creature on your property, has made your insurance costs skyrocket.  It bites you one day, "it's an accident" you tell yourself, and the doctor hits you for $20 large to pay for stitches, rabies and other shots.  You don't have it, but you have to spend that or you might die.

It's no longer simply about the risk of killing you in your sleep.  Now it can kill you any time it wants.  It has razor-sharp teeth and demands more and more food.  When it's hungry and you have no money to buy it food, it eats your couch.  Oh, and it shits everywhere too -- all over your carpet, your nice wood floors and even in your bed.

Welcome to your own self-imposed hell.

What is this monster's genus and species?

It's debt.

Netflix is getting hammered on this.  They have an insane amount of debt that they took on which generates a forward and irrevocable obligation to pay in the form of interest for "original content."  But their subscriber growth rate, which made people think this was reasonable, was a chimera; it was a forward projection of exponential growth forever into the future, which is mathematically impossible: There are only so many humans on the planet.

Now it's caught up with them.  The monster is taking nips out of their feet while they sleep.  Soon it will consume their head.

How'd they get a $400 stock price, now just over $300?  On bullcrap you believed -- willingly, knowingly, while prodded by CNBS and others.  But let's not kid ourselves -- you hit the "buy" button, didn't you?

The same is true nationally.  It's true for the entire stock market.  Buybacks, funded with debt, are a noose around your neck you cannot get rid of.  The shares are repurchased, you bought them at a fixed price but when they're worth less on the open market you have a loss you cannot get rid of and, much worse, you have a forward obligation to pay that interest forever on your loss-making transaction!  There's only one thing worse than a loss-making transaction and that's one that never, ever stops costing you more and more money!

EPS goes up when you do this as long as earnings are increasing.  But when you have a loss the loss per share goes up by exactly the same amount.  This garbage may well double the stock market originally when the earnings are improving (and it did) but it inevitably will crash the market by twice as much when earnings turn bad since the negative number will be twice the size it would have been otherwise.  Instead of a 40% loss it'll be 80% -- or even 100% when the firms involved all go bankrupt because they simply can't pay.

The same is true for government deficit spending on things that are just flat-out gone; that is, anything that is consumed.  Like food stamps, health care and similar.  The interest expense is there forevermore unless you pay down the debt which you cannot do until and unless you stop deficit spending entirely.  That now amounts to a trillion dollars a year, or roughly one quarter of all government spending.  Do you think the government will stop feeding the monster even after it has chewed off an entire foot and half a leg?

Everyone knew this when that crap started -- both at the government and individual company level.

They knew it and did it anyway.

They lied to you.

On purpose.

They're still lying.

Kudlow, Cramer, President Trump, Nancy Pelosi, all of them.

That meets the classic definition of fraud and should be justification to hang them all except for one problem: You cheered it on, welcomed it, voted for it and in fact in the political sphere both parties were equal participants and there has not been one revolt, organized or not, by anyone in this nation demanding it stop "or else."  Quite to the contrary; everyone is demanding that the monster be fed even more and get ever larger -- forever!

So get up, stand in front of the mirror and then fuck yourself because you're looking at the responsible party.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)