R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 21, 2020 at 7:46 pm

Paul Plante says:

With respect to the End of the Age of Reason, which my little grand daughter argues, and eloquently so, I must say, is also the End of the Age of Rule of Law in the United States of America, and thus, to her, the End of Western Civilization, according to “A Short History Of Western Civilization” by Charles Edward Smith, Louisiana State University, and Lynn M. Case, University of Pennyslvania, copyright 1948, which she is basing her arguments on, “”Civilized existence is possible only after social institutions such as the family, the kindred, and the tribe have in turn been integrated into political organizations such as city-states, kingdoms, or democracies, wherein governmental devices ensure harmonious relations among individuals.””

When Barack Hussein Obama, says my little grand daughter, can openly declare in a federal court setting with absolute impunity and immunity that as president of the United States, he had the absolute and unreviewable power to destroy the Nation as Barack Obama says he did in Juliana, without a word of censure from any federal judge, and without a howl of outrage by the Juliana lawyers, then Constitutional government as my generation once knew it is no longer in existence in the world Obama bequeathed her with his legacy of contempt for the law and Constitution, and as she says, children her age are now living in a mad house where nothing will ever make sense, or be stable, or healthful, and she would like to know how that came to be, which takes us back to “A Short History Of Western Civilization, as follows:

Civilization also anticipates the maintenance of peaceful and rational relations among political entities as well as among individuals; it is in this respect that mankind has proved most backwards, as is evidenced by the frequency of armed conflicts.

end quotes

As my little grand daughter says, and I can’t argue the point with her, when a federal appeals court judge speaks of “the other branches having abdicated their responsibility to remediate the problem,” we no longer can claim to have either peaceful or rational relations among political entities; instead, we have the hysteria, insanity, and madness which have created in their turn Greta Thunberg and ”her school strike movement which to my grand daughter seems to be promoting ignorance over rational thought, which again takes us back to “A Short History Of Western Civilization, for what my little grand daughter attributes a big part of the problem in younger generations who can’t use words to communicate any longer, having grown up with TWEETING on TWITTER, to wit:

One cannot visualize civilized existence without the anterior development of speech, language, and writing, which make possible the transfer of thought and, through the medium of literature, the bequest to posterity of the accumulated knowledge of past and present.

Educational facilities must be available to implement the transfer of community knowledge to the young and to stimulate and enlarge the contributions which they will make to the cultural heritage upon their attainment of maturity.

end quotes

According to the latest statistics, the average TWEET length today is just 33-characters, which should serve to give one an idea of how the transfer of community knowledge to the young is happening today – just 33-characters at a time, which makes for small thinking, which takes us back one more time to A Short History Of Western Civilization, to wit:

All would probably agree that in our day technological advance, mastery of the forces of our physical environment, has far outstripped the evolution of social and governmental institutions, which should be adequately responsive to the changes wrought by science and invention.

Civilization therefore must not be considered as a static and final stage in human progress.

Civilized existence when once attained does not become an inalienable possession.

The cultural heritage of the past must be understood and constantly augmented by the contributions of the present.

When civilization ceases to be dynamic, it soon ceases to be civilization.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... of-reason/
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 23, 2020 at 7:55 pm

Paul Plante says :

And here my little grand daughter would like me to add that unlike all the adults in here, or out there in America, soon enough, and all too soon, she is going to have to share a classroom with all of these psychologically-impaired children who have been led to believe through media hysteria-mongering about “GLOBAL WARMING” and “CLIMATE CHANGE,” which hysteria-mongering goes back to the dire predictions of Jimmy Hansen, who now appears to be a nuclear industry SHILL and as a result, there is a high likelihood of her having to undergo peer group pressure from these children to go out on strike and not go to school because Greta Thunberg says that is the right thing to do to stop climate change, which is horse****, and she, as a result, is going to need some powerful counter-arguments to demonstrate to them that they are fools to listen to what Greta Thunberg, who wants American school children to be stupid, says.

Hence, the importance of the Cape Charles Mirror to her generation, which is the generation most impacted by all this media hysteria-mongering that has the Himalayan glaciers melting fifteen years from now to drown us all beneath the waves of the ever-rising ocean, like what happened back in the time of Noah.

Little Greta Thunberg runs around with IPCC reports tucked under her arm, calling them “the science” that she wants little children like my grand daughter to blindly except without question, which my little grand daughter refuses to do, hence her need for some rational counter-arguments before she is in the inevitable confrontation with the GRETA KIDS she is sure to run into in her future classrooms settings, where she won’t have any adults to rely on, so she will have to stand on her own two feet, which takes us back in time to an article in the TELEGRAPH entitled “Himalayan glaciers are melting, says IPCC research – The Himalayan glaciers are melting after all, according to new research released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).” on 04 Dec. 2011, to wit:

The research was released in an effort to draw a line under the embarrassing mistakes made about the effects of global warming on the region in the past.

The IPCC were forced to apologise for claiming that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.

The 2009 scandal, known as ‘Himalayagate’ led to criticism of the IPCC, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to warn governments around the world about the effects of climate change.

end quotes

“Why does Greta Thunberg tell people to trust the IPCC when the IPCC is not trustworthy,” my little grand daughter would like to know, to which I can only respond that as far as I can determine, little Greta is so petrified by fear that she can’t think straight, and thus, cannot be trusted to be rational in her statements about anything, which takes us to an article in The Guardian entitled “Claims Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 were false, says UN scientist” by Fred Pearce published on 20 Jan. 2010, where we had as follows with respect to what has caused Greta Thunberg and her followers to be so hysterical and irrational and psychologically distressed, to wit:

One paragraph, buried in 3,000 pages of reports and published almost three years ago, has humbled the head of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Facing global outcry, Rajendra Pachauri backed down and apologised today for a disputed IPCC claim that there was a very high chance the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035.

The assertion, now discredited, was included in the most recent IPCC report assessing climate change science, ­published in 2007.

Those reports are widely credited with convincing the world that human activity was causing global warming.

end quotes

Stated more correctly and to the point as my little grand daughter would have it, those false reports caused the hysteria mongering in the media which as resulted in all the confusion and outright lies she has been bequeathed along with her generation, buried under a mountain of lies bigger than Mt. Everest, with no clear way of discerning where the truth might lie, but for the Cape Charles Mirror, which takes us back to that Guardian article, to wit:

The offending paragraph, in the panel’s fourth assessment report on the impacts of climate change, said: “Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high.”

In IPCC terminology a “very high” likelihood has a specific meaning: more than a 90% chance of coming true.

The report’s only quoted source for the claim was a 2005 campaigning report from the environment group WWF.

In turn, the WWF report’s only source was remarks made in 1999 by a leading Indian glaciologist, Syed Hasnain, then vice-chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, to journalists at two magazines, New Scientist in London, and Down to Earth in New Delhi.

Hasnain had never submitted the suggestion of such an early demise to a scientific journal because, he said last week, it had always been “speculative”.

How this made it to the august pages of the IPCC report remains unclear.

But the IPCC text is almost identical to that in the Down to Earth article in April 1999.

WWF said today it regretted “any confusion caused” and would amend its report.

The panel is yet to make a similar commitment.

end quotes

The “panel,” of course, is the same IPCC that little Greta Thunberg wants my little grand daughter to accept as the gospel truth, when it is anything but, as we see by returning to the Guardian, as follows:

Glaciologists who spoke to the Guardian say Himalayan glaciers contain so much ice it will be 300 years before it vanishes.

The affair raises serious questions about the rigour of the IPCC’s process of sifting and assessing the thousands of research findings it includes in its reports.

It also raises questions about the competence of Pachauri, who angrily defended the report’s conclusions about Himalayan glaciers after they were called “alarmist” last autumn by India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh.

Pachauri accused Ramesh of relying on “voodoo science”, called the minister “extremely arrogant” and said Ramesh’s claims were “not peer reviewed”.

It is now clear that it was the panel’s claims that were not reviewed.

The author of the part of the panel’s report, another Indian glaciologist, Murari Lal, last week defended inclusion of 2035, saying “the error if any lies with Dr Hasnain’s assertion”.

Pachauri’s statement repudiates that position.

He said he “regrets the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance”.

end quotes

So what is my little grand daughter to believe?

An existential question for her times!

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-233981
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 24, 2020 at 7:39 pm

Paul Plante says:

And with respect to holding Barack Hussein Obama to account for his refusal to protect the future of my grand daughter’s generation by his repudiation of OUR United States Constitution in Juliana, with his incredible claim that as president he had the absolute and unreviewable power to destroy the Nation, the little girl would have me post these words spoken on the floor of the United States House of Representatives by Congressman George S. Boutwell on Dec.2nd, 1867 as her justification for holding Obama liable now that he no longer enjoys immunity from prosecution, to wit:

I think that we can not do otherwise than believe, that he (President Andrew Johnson) has disregarded that great injunction of the Constitution to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, that there is but one remedy.

The remedy is with this House, and it is nowhere else.

If we neglect or refuse to use our powers when the case arises demanding decisive action, the Government ceases to be a Government of law and becomes a Government of men.

end quotes

One hundred fifty-three (153) years later says my little grand daughter, with President Barack Hussein Obama openly and blatantly disregarding that great injunction of the Constitution to take care that the laws be faithfully executed as he clearly did in Juliana, that is exactly what has happened – because of the failure to hold Obama to account while he was still president and still impeachable, the Government has in fact ceased to be a Government of law and has become a Government of men, and Obama gets to skate.

With respect to Obama skating, my little grand daughter points to the utter hypocrisy of Adam Schiff in Finding of Fact VI of the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence document, “The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report,” to wit:

In so doing, the President undermined U.S. policy supporting anti-corruption reform and the rule of law in Ukraine, and undermined U.S. national security.

end quotes

Trump undermined rule of law in Ukraine, so the report alleges, notwithstanding Trump has no Constitutional authority in Ukraine, a small detail but vital, and for that, he was impeached.

On the other hand, right here in America, which is where it matters to my little grand daughter and her young friends, Obama not only undermined rule of law with his position in Juliana that as president he had the absolute and unreviewable power to destroy the Nation, but he made an absolute mockery of it and the Constitution, for which he must be held to account by a citizen grand jury.

And again, she thanks the Cape Charles Mirror for letting her get her message out to the other children in America affected by Obama’s dereliction of duty, and hopefully, to their parents, as well to see justice for the children done here.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-235501
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 25, 2020 at 10:20 pm

Paul Plante says:

Now, to understand how these Juliana children plaintiffs came to have standing in federal district court to sue Barack Hussein Obama on civil rights grounds before that standing was stripped from them in January of this year, we need to go back to November of 2016, right after the November presidential election, when Hussein Obama still had time left enough left in office for Articles of Impeachment for GROSS DERELICTION OF DUTY to be lodged against him by the House of Representatives, that had to be aware of this civil rights lawsuit filed against Obama by these aggrieved children who are now out of court, where we have, to wit:

Plaintiffs in this civil rights action are a group of young people between the ages of eight and nineteen (“youth plaintiffs”); Earth Guardians, an association of young environmental activists; and Dr. James Hansen, acting as guardian for future generations.

Plaintiffs filed this action against defendants the United States, President Barack Obama, and numerous executive agencies.

Plaintiffs allege defendants have known for more than fifty years that the carbon dioxide (“CO;’) produced by burning fossil fuels was destabilizing the climate system in a way that would “significantly endanger plaintiffs, with the damage persisting for millenia.” First. Am. Comp!

Despite that knowledge, plaintiffs assert defendants, “(b)y their exercise of sovereign authority over our country’s atmosphere and fossil fuel resources, … permitted, encouraged, and otherwise enabled continued exploitation, production, and combustion of fossil fuels, … deliberately allow[ing] atmospheric C02 concentrations to escalate to levels unprecedented in human history[.]” Id

Although many different entities contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, plaintiffs aver defendants bear “a higher degree of responsibility than any other individual, entity, or country” for exposing plaintiffs to the dangers of climate change. Id.

Plaintiffs argue defendants’ actions violate their substantive due process rights to life, liberty, and property, and that defendants have violated their obligation to hold certain natural resources in trust for the people and for future generations.

Plaintiffs assert there is a very short window in which defendants could act to phase out fossil fuel exploitation and avert environmental catastrophe.

They seek (1) a declaration their constitutional and public trust rights have been violated and (2) an order enjoining defendants from violating those rights and directing defendants to develop a plan to reduce C02 emissions.

Defendants moved to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Doc. 27.

end quotes

That was on 16 November 2016, and those words were the words of Federal District Court Judge Ann Louise Aiken who graduated with a Juris Doctor in 1979 from the University of Oregon School of Law and who subsequently was twice nominated for a seat on the United States District Court for the District of Oregon by Bill “Bubba” Clinton, Hillary’s husband, in November 1995, and again on January 7, 1997, before Aiken was finally confirmed by the United States Senate on January 28, 1998, receiving her commission on February 4, 1998.

In the section titled “BACKGROUND,” Judge Aiken wrote as follows:

This is no ordinary lawsuit.

Plaintiffs challenge the policies, acts, and omissions of the President of the United States, the Council on Environmental Quality, the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Department of Energy, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Transportation (“DOT”), the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”).

This lawsuit challenges decisions defendants have made across a vast set of topics – decisions like whether and to what extent to regulate C02 emissions from power plants and vehicles, whether to permit fossil fuel extraction and development to take place on federal lands, how much to charge for use of those lands, whether to give tax breaks to the fossil fuel industry, whether to subsidize or directly fund that industry, whether to fund the construction of fossil fuel infrastructure such as natural gas pipelines at home and abroad, whether to permit the export and import of fossil fuels from and to the United States, and whether to authorize new marine coal terminal projects.

Plaintiffs assert defendants’ decisions on these topics have substantially caused the planet to warm and the oceans to rise.

They draw a direct causal line between defendants’ policy choices and floods, food shortages, destruction of property, species extinction, and a host of other harms.

This lawsuit is not about proving that climate change is happening or that human activity is driving it.

For the purposes of this motion, those facts are undisputed.

end quotes

Now, there is where I have to step in as an engineer and say, “whoa, when did those alleged ‘facts’ become undisputed?”

“Right after the IPCC said all the Himalayan glaciers were going to melt by 2035?”

But I don’t get to ask those questions, or have them answered, which is not the way science is supposed to work, which takes us back to Chapter 39 of “A Short History Of Western Civilization” by Charles Edward Smith, Louisiana State University, and Lynn M. Case, University of Pennsylvania, copyright 1948, titled “The Age of Enlightenment,” where we have as follows:

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were characterized by the advance of rationalism and the consequent weakening of dogmatism and superstition.

end quotes

Now, scientific rationalism, that which I employ as an engineer, is defined as a belief or theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response, and the 16 November 2016 decision of Judge Aiken is devoid of scientific rationalism, and instead is an emotional response, which takes us to dogmatism, which is exactly we are seeing here in this statement of Judge Aiken that “(F)or the purposes of this motion, those facts are undisputed,” where dogmatism as practiced by Judge Aiken is the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others.

As to superstition, it is defined as an excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings, which is what “carbon pollution” is becoming in our times, or an unfounded belief, such as all changes in weather today are caused by carbon dioxide in the air, and no other natural cause, which is rank horse****.

And that observation takes us to these critical words from that 16 November 2016 Aiken decision which in January 2020 are going to find them stripped of their federal standing, and out of court, to wit:

Plaintiffs could have brought a lawsuit predicated on technical regulatory violations, but they chose a different path.

As masters of their complaint, they have elected to assert constitutional rather than statutory claims.

end quotes

But these children were hardly the “masters of their complaint,” precisely because they were children who couldn’t be expected to be able to put together a federal civil rights lawsuit and to be able to pick out a legal strategy, a failing one, as it turned out, with ramifications for all children in America, not just these Juliana plaintiffs. of asserting constitutional claims rather than statutory claims.

Who were the “masters of their complaint” were the lawyers who were using the lawsuit as a fundraising tool, along with “FATHER OF CLIMATE CHANGE HYSTERIA” Dr. Jimmy Hansen, who became involved in this lawsuit as an “expert” according to the July 12, 2017 New York Magazine article “‘The Planet Could Become Ungovernable’: Climate Scientist James Hansen on Obama’s Environmental Record, Scientific Reticence, and His Climate Lawsuit Against the Federal Government” by David Wallace-Wells, where we have, to wit:

This week, to accompany our cover story on worst-case climate scenarios, we’re publishing a series of extended interviews with climatologists on the subject — most of them from the “godfather generation” of scientists who first raised the alarm about global warming several decades ago.

James Hansen is the former head of climate research for NASA, the author of the legendary early “zero model” for climate change, and is now the lead scientific figure in a lawsuit being brought against the federal government alleging complicity on climate change, which Hansen and his fellow litigants argue is a violation of the equal protection clause — since the costs of change will fall unequally on future generations.

Q: Tell me, how did you get involved in this lawsuit?

Hansen: That was interesting.

I wrote this article, “The Threat to the Planet,” in 2006, in The New York Review of Books.

It started out, “Animals are on the run.”

It was read by Mary Wood, a legal scholar at the University of Oregon who’s most responsible for developing the Atmospheric Trust idea — that the planet is held in trust by the current generation for future generations.

A student or postdoc of hers sent an email to me — I was a government employee, involved in a lot of stuff, so I never responded until finally we set up a teleconference in 2010.

I agreed to write a paper to provide the scientific basis for a lawsuit.

Then I decided, rather than writing the paper myself, I should get a bunch of international experts to be co-authors.

It took forever.

Q: Why?

Hansen: We submitted the paper to PNAS, and I’m an Academy member, so if I submit a review, I should be able to publish.

But the editor decided it was an unusual paper, with “normative statements,” and he gave it to an anonymous editorial board member, and he said I had to take out these normative statements criticizing the government.

So we iterated back and forth two or three times.

Finally, when he said the word dangerous was normative — that’s when I withdrew the paper and submitted it to PLOS One.

And eventually finally in 2013 it was published.

The paper was used for the first lawsuit, which got as far as the D.C. District Court, just below the Supreme Court.

And we lost at that level.

end quotes

And there I am going to pause for a moment to let those words sink in, because this is truly a fascinating story of the times we are in, and the impact it is going to have on our children and grandchildren is serious, and I don’t want that reality to get buried under too many words, at once.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-235501
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 26, 2020 at 7:47 pm

Paul Plante says :

Before returning to Jimmy Hansen, the “FATHER OF CLIMATE CHANGE HYSTERIA,” and self-proclaimed GUARDIAN of FUTURE GENERATIONS of American children, and the role he played in this failed Juliana appeal which has resulted in these children Jimmy was acting as guardian of getting tossed unceremoniously out of court just recently on January 17, 2020, with respect to my own “standing” to comment on this botched law suit, which I think has greatly harmed little children in America like my grand daughter, on Sunday, February 8, 2004, the Albany, New York Times Union had an article on pro se litigants taking on the corrupt state of New York in court wherein was stated as follows:

Plante, a former Rensselaer County engineer, has taken it upon himself to reverse the illegal permitting of local gravel mining and waste hauling facilities and the alleged backroom commercial rezoning of his rural community.

He has gone up against town, planning and zoning boards; Rensselaer County government; Waste Management; Showers Enterprises and R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc.; the State Department of Environmental Conservation; and the attorney general’s office, among others.

The 58-year old disabled Vietnam veteran also is a vocal activist, who is currently attempting to prove in federal court that county social services, veterans and Samaritan Hospital officials tried for forcibly commit him to a mental health facility in 2001.

“The law is far to precious a thing to be left in the hands of lawyers,” said Plante, who has been called every name in the book.

“I did an Abe Lincoln.”

“If he could stretch out on the dirt floor and learn the law, so could I.”

Cognizant of the old adage that says those who represent themselves have a fool for a client, Plante confided: “I’d rather have a fool for a client than a fool for a lawyer.”

end quotes

And all these years later, I still feel the same way.

You don’t go to court as a non-lawyer and win against full-grown lawyers like what the New York state attorney general’s office puts on the playing field to defend corrupt and criminal acts by the state of New York and win by being stupid about what you are taking on.

You win by demonstrating chapter and verse HOW the hack politicians have violated the law, by first knowing the law(s) that should apply in any situation, and yes, the Constitution is a law unto itself, and then making it clear from the record that the law could not have been followed, because there is nothing in the record to prove it was, and the burden of proof is on the hack politicians to provide that record.

In this case, the Juliana lawyers and Jimmy Hansen had the outright gift of a “SLAM-DUNK” handed to them by Hussein Obama himself with his claim that he had the right as president to ignore the law, which clearly violated Article II of our Constitution, and they never said a word about it, at all.

WHY?

Why did they let Hussein Obama slide, instead of holding him accountable?

The children of America would like to know.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-235501
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 27, 2020 at 7:34 pm

Paul Plante says :

Getting back to the existential question on my little grand daughter’s mind, which is how did these Juliana lawyers and Dr. Jimmy Hansen let Obama slide when they had him cold making it clear he had no intention of taking care that the laws were enforced to protect those children from Obama’s depraved indifference to their plight, which is to say, Obama was caught out admitting that he had no intention of living up to his Constitutional oath of office, we need to go back to the New York Magazine article “‘The Planet Could Become Ungovernable’: Climate Scientist James Hansen on Obama’s Environmental Record, Scientific Reticence, and His Climate Lawsuit Against the Federal Government” by David Wallace-Wells on July 12, 2017, where we have the following relevant background as to the lawsuit itself, to wit:

Q: What happened?

Hansen: The D.C. District Court judge essentially said that we hadn’t shown a constitutional basis for the lawsuit.

end quotes

And the fact is that in the end, search as one might, they never did show a constitutional basis for the lawsuit, which is why it got thrown out by the Court of Appeals on 17 January 2020, although they well could have, if they hadn’t of been stupid about it, to the detriment of not only the Juliana petitioners, but little children like my grand daughter who is just now coming on the scene.

With respect to that, consider the “Alfredus” essay of Samuel Tenny in the Freeman’s Oracle in New Hampshire on January 18, 1788, to wit:

To prevent any interference between the federal and state governments, the objects of the former are pointed out in the preamble to the Constitution, viz. “To form a more perfect union — establish justice — insure domestic tranquility — provide for the common defence — promote the general welfare — and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

end quotes

And right there is the “SLAM DUNK,” as even someone as young as my little grand daughter could tell you, because there is no way that the position taken by Obama in that lawsuit could:

* Form a more perfect union (To the contrary, Obama’s position in that lawsuit was that he had the power to destroy the Union, as we see in Juliana, to wit: Plaintiffs bring suit to enforce the most basic structural principle embedded in our system of ordered liberty: that the Constitution does not condone the Nation’s willful destruction);.

* Establish justice (Obama’s position that he could destroy the Union as president made a mockery of the concept of Justice and if anything, disestablished it here in the USA);

* Insure domestic tranquility (Obama’s position that he could destroy the nation insures not domestic tranquility, but domestic chaos, instead);

* Promote the general welfare (Obama’s denial that these children had rights and he as president had an obligation to those children to take care the laws were enforced made a mockery of the concept of promoting the general welfare); and

* Secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity; (When an American president like Barack Hussein Obama can openly proclaim in federal court with impunity that he could destroy the nation, without getting called on it by anyone, then the blessings of liberty are long since gone to us and our posterity).

end quotes

So why did the Juliana lawyers and Dr. James Hansen let Barack Hussein Obama slide?

Stay tuned as we continue to search the record for that elusive answer.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-234766
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 28, 2020 at 7:57 pm

Paul Plante says :

And as we continue to contemplate and document the AGE of REASON in the United States of America being unequivocally and officially dead as of December 2005 when now-Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayer, then an appeals court judge on the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, ruled that it was for the good of society-at-large that a professional engineer who would not lie to them or deceive them with “scientific falsehoods” should be declared “mentally ill and dangerous” by the State of New York and consigned to a gulag (state mental hospital) for drug-induced “mind wiping,” and the AGE of UN-REASON, or ANTHROPOCENE, a Greek word which translates roughly as AGE of ABSURDITY, coming into being definitively in December of 2005, when society-at-large in America accepted without question the ruling of now-Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayer, then an appeals court judge on the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, that it was for their own good that a professional engineer who would not lie to them or deceive them with “scientific falsehoods” should be declared “mentally ill and dangerous” by the State of New York and consigned to a gulag (state mental hospital) for drug-induced “mind wiping,” let’s go back to Chapter 39, “The Age of Enlightenment,” of A Short History of Western Civilization by Charles Edward Smith, Louisiana State University, and Lynn M. Case, University of Pennsylvania, copyright 1948, where we have as follows with respect to the development of “science,” or rather, “rational scientific thinking,” to wit:

The works of Francis Bacon (1561-1626) were a powerful factor in producing a more critical intellectual attitude.

In his “Advancement of Learning,” he held that the primary sources of error in human reasoning were reverence for antiquity, blind acceptance of popular ideas, failure to employ critical observation and experiment, and intellectual impatience, which promotes hasty acceptance of tenuous conclusions.

end quotes

Focusing for the moment on the phrase “primary sources of error in human reasoning,” the word “reasoning” itself, which is an important concept here, is defined as “the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way.”

And that is exactly what got the engineer who would not lie to people condemned by the corrupt State of New York, and then-Circuit judge Sonia Sotomayor of the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in 2005 so that he can no longer practice as a professional engineer in New York State to protect and safeguard life, health and property – his refusal to do other than think about things in a logical, sensible way, which takes us back in time to 2016, when Hillary Clinton was running for president as the chosen successor to Barack Hussein Obama to carry on his legacy of gross negligence and depraved indifference to human life, and the TALK RADIO 1300 Report for March 2, 2016 at 6:45 am, to wit:

So to bring this disgusting chapter in our local history to a sort of close, since this story is going to go on whether I speak out or not, nothing has ended here with Andy Cuomo’’s successful cover-up of the gross negligence which has caused this public health fiasco, the people of Rensselaer County and especially Hoosick Falls, have gotten exactly what they asked for, which is no public health protection in Rensselaer County.

No groundwater protection, because the people of Rensselaer County and Hoosick Falls, through their County Executive John L. Buono, and Kathleen Jimino after him, did not want an honest professional engineer, they wanted a political whore -– someone who would look the other way while telling them sweet lies that everything is alright, don’’t worry, we have you protected, when who was being protected in reality was the polluters, because profits mean more than human life in NYS and Rensselaer County.

I don’’t think anyone expressed that better than did the Dean of Area Political Commentators Fred LeBrun in a commentary in the Albany Times Union on July 7, 1993 where Mr. LeBrun noted that the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was dumped for insubordination by his boss in the county health department, Ken Van Praag.

Insubordination was the Associate Public Health Engineer’’s refusal to lie for Rensselaer County on command, his refusal to mislead the people of Rensselaer County whose lives he had a duty, as quaint a term as that is today, to protect.

According to Mr. LeBrun, who would know because he has an inside track on things political in Rensselaer County, officially, the Associate Public Health Engineer was terminated for talking directly to the media after he’’d been told to route through his boss his brutally candid observations concerning the competence and motivations of those around him.

But unofficially, and here Mr. LeBrun hits the nail on the head, what got the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer bounced was what Fred LeBrun called his “hard-headed, uncompromising view of his official duties, a vision not always shared by others in the county health department, or few others on the planet for that matter,” including the NYSDOH, and yes, the Office of Governor of the state of New York, despite the pompous bellowings of governor Andy Cuomo to the contrary.

The Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer refused to lie for the politicians.

He refused to be a political whore.

In a Troy RECORD editorial dated 4 April 1989, it was stated that the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was “honest to a fault,” a point not challenged by his attackers, and that, “as a matter of fact, that appears to be the bone they have to pick with him – that he is too honest and is unyielding in his honesty.”

The message was clear and unequivocal and was accepted by the people of Rensselaer County and Hoosick Falls without challenge –- we cannot and will not have unyielding honesty in either Rensselaer County or the Cauldron of Corruption of New York state where the culture of corruption grows like barnacles on a boat bottom.

So, as Fred LeBrun told it on July 7, 1993, because of the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer’’s “hard-headed, uncompromising view of his official duties, a vision not always shared by others in the county health department, or few others on the planet for that matter,” including the NYSDOH, the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer simply had to go and did.

And so the history that leads right to today in Hoosick Falls, Rensselaer County and the state of New York was set in motion right out in the open, right before everyone’’s eyes.

And that is the way it goes, people, what you sow is what you reap.

end quotes

As these children in the Juliana civil rights lawsuit just found out on 17 January 2020, when they were unceremoniously tossed out of federal court because their constitutional claims were simply stupid, that saying remains very true to this day.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-235501
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR March 1, 2020 at 10:38 pm

Paul Plante says :

Getting back to the question of why “FATHER OF CLIMATE CHANGE HYSTERIA” Dr. Jimmy Hansen, the self-proclaimed “Guardian” of the earth’s future generations, and the Juliana lawyers let Barack Hussein Obama slide and skate and wriggle off the hook when they had him dead to rights admitting that he did not intend to “take care that the laws were enforced,” despite the admonition in Article II of OUR United States Constitution that he do so, as president, for the answer, we need to go back to the New York Magazine article “‘The Planet Could Become Ungovernable’: Climate Scientist James Hansen on Obama’s Environmental Record, Scientific Reticence, and His Climate Lawsuit Against the Federal Government” by David Wallace-Wells on July 12, 2017, where first, we have the author of the article making this statement to Jimmy about the Juliana lawsuit, itself, to wit:

David Wallace-Wells: It’s interesting to hear you talk about it, because in reading about the suit I’ve processed it as a work of protest and advocacy, not something that was aimed at really winning.

end quotes

Frankly, that is my impression, as well, that the lawyers and Jimmy never actually intended to win the suit, because I viewed it as nothing more than a fundraising tool for the Juliana lawyers and Jimmy’s own programs, which were the subject of a Science article entitled “Hansen’s Climate Science and Advocacy Project Under Way” by Eli Kintisch on Feb. 26, 2014, where we learned as follows:

James Hansen may have retired from NASA but he’s still active in the climate change wars.

Five months into its existence, his Program on Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions at Columbia University is moving ahead on its unique goals.

Led by the 72-year-old climate scientist, the initiative focuses on bringing policy-relevant science to the public, building on dogged — and often controversial — efforts along those lines by its director.

The team has raised sufficient funds to support its efforts for at least 2 years, Kharecha says.

Its donors include nonprofits and foundations such as the Flora Family Foundation and ClimateWorks and individuals, including philanthropists Jeremy Grantham and H. F. “Gerry” Lenfest.

“We hope to get external grants from federal funding agencies as well,” Kharecha says.

“I’ve been able to meet with him more, as he’s not quite as slammed with the organizational duties,” says attorney Julia Olson, director of Our Children’s Trust, an advocacy group suing the U.S. government to act on climate change.

Hansen, supported by his two Columbia colleagues and other scientists, has written an amicus brief for that effort, which relies on the doctrine of environmental “public trust.”

He plans to testify in the case, which is ongoing in courts in several states.

end quotes

That was 26 February 2014 that we were told that Jimmy Hansen was going to testify in court on behalf of these children, and now we know where that all ended up, thanks to Jimmy, with the children unceremoniously tossed out of court on 17 January 2020, this after Jimmy stated as follows in that New York Magazine article “‘The Planet Could Become Ungovernable’: Climate Scientist James Hansen on Obama’s Environmental Record, Scientific Reticence, and His Climate Lawsuit Against the Federal Government” by David Wallace-Wells on July 12, 2017, as follows concerning the Juliana lawsuit, to wit:

Public trust is a common-law thing, so while you can argue it is protected by the Constitution, it isn’t explicitly in the Constitution.

But even before meeting Mary, I had started in my talks to discuss equal rights and equal protection of the law for young people.

And now, in going back and doing it again (refiling the lawsuit in Oregon instead of Washington, D.C.) , they are still using the public trust argument but also, explicitly, the idea of equal protection of the law and due process, that young people are being deprived of life, liberty, and property.

I think — I’m 99.99 percent certain we’re going to win in Oregon.

As you know, it’s—

A friendly circuit!

The West Coast is more liberal.

But I think the constitutional basis is clear.

end quotes

The federal appeals court found different, however:

The plaintiffs’ experts opine that atmospheric carbon levels of 350 parts per million are necessary to stabilize the global climate.

But, even accepting those opinions as valid, they do not suggest how an order from this Court can achieve that level, other than by ordering the government to develop a plan.

Although the plaintiffs’ invitation to get the ball rolling by simply ordering the promulgation of a plan is beguiling, it ignores that an Article III court will thereafter be required to determine whether the plan is sufficient to remediate the claimed constitutional violation of the plaintiffs’ right to a “climate system capable of sustaining human life.”

We doubt that any such plan can be supervised or enforced by an Article III court.

And, in the end, any plan is only as good as the court’s power to enforce it.

C. Our dissenting colleague quite correctly notes the gravity of the plaintiffs’ evidence; we differ only as to whether an Article III court can provide their requested redress.

In suggesting that we can, the dissent reframes the plaintiffs’ claimed constitutional right variously as an entitlement to “the country’s perpetuity,” Diss. at 35–37, 39, or as one to freedom from “the amount of fossil-fuel emissions that will irreparably devastate our Nation,” id. at 57.

But if such broad constitutional rights exist, we doubt that the plaintiffs would have Article III standing to enforce them.

Their alleged individual injuries do not flow from a violation of these claimed rights.

Indeed, any injury from the dissolution of the Republic would be felt by all citizens equally, and thus would not constitute the kind of discrete and particularized injury necessary for Article III standing. See Friends of the Earth, 528 U.S. at 180-81.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-236248
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR March 3, 2020 at 7:26 pm

Paul Plante says :

Cutting to the chase for my little grand daughter here, the answer to the question of why the “FATHER OF CLIMATE CHANGE HYSTERIA” Dr. Jimmy Hansen, the self-proclaimed “Guardian” of the earth’s future generations, and the Juliana lawyers let Barack Hussein Obama slide and skate and wriggle off the hook when they had him dead to rights admitting that he did not intend to “take care that the laws were enforced,” despite the admonition in Article II of OUR United States Constitution that he do so, the answer from Jimmy himself is that it always was just a political game with him, and he thought that Obama was on his side, that is to say, Jimmy’s side, when the facts of the matter are that Obama was never on anybody’s “side,” but his own as we see from the Guardian article “Ex-Nasa scientist: 30 years on, world is failing ‘miserably’ to address climate change – James Hansen, who gave a climate warning in 1988 Senate testimony, says real hoax is by leaders claiming to take action” by Oliver Milman in New York @olliemilman on 19 Jun 2018, to wit:

There is particular scorn for Barack Obama.

Hansen says in a scathing upcoming book that the former president “failed miserably” on climate change and oversaw policies that were “late, ineffectual and partisan”.

Hansen even accuses Obama of passing up the opportunity to thwart Donald Trump’s destruction of US climate action, by declining to settle a lawsuit the scientist, his granddaughter and 20 other young people are waging against the government, accusing it of unconstitutionally causing peril to their living environment.

“Near the end of his administration the US said it would reduce emissions 80% by 2050,” Hansen said.

“Our lawsuit demands a reduction of 6% a year so I thought, ‘That’s close enough, let’s settle the lawsuit.’”

“We got through to Obama’s office but he decided against it.”

end quotes

And Jimmy was stunned, as we learn from the New York Magazine article “‘The Planet Could Become Ungovernable’: Climate Scientist James Hansen on Obama’s Environmental Record, Scientific Reticence, and His Climate Lawsuit Against the Federal Government” by David Wallace-Wells on July 12, 2017, to wit:

Jimmy Hansen: And finally, near the end of the Obama administration, I tried to get Obama to settle our lawsuit.

Which would have made sense.

Actually the judge in Oregon was puzzled as to why Obama was fighting us.

Because Obama, when he talked about the planet, he sounded like us.

David Wallace-Wells: He (Obama) uses the phrases “existential threat,” though I think some people don’t quite understand what he means by that.

end quotes

That was on July 12, 2017, and going on three years later, with time to reflect on what 8 years of Hussein Obama has meant for both America and the world, think Syria, for example, which is a huge humanitarian mess today because of Hussein Obama thinking the world was his to rule, and break as he pleased, we know that when Hussein used the words “existential threat,” they were nothing more than a fancy soundbite.

And because Jimmy Hansen lacked the hormones to pin Obama to the mat, Obama got to do as he had been doing since he was young, which is SKATING, which takes us back to the Guardian, as follows:

“Poor Jim Hansen.”

“He’s a tragic hero,” said Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard academic who studies the history of science.

end quotes

And indeed there is a CULT of Jimmy Hansen, as we can see from a ClientEarth article entitled “Climate litigation a lasting legacy of Hansen’s historic testimony 30 years ago” on 25 June 2018, to wit:

Saturday marked 30 years since then NASA climate scientist James Hansen gave his historic testimony on human-induced global warming to a US Senate committee.

While not the first warning to decision-makers, it was certainly the most publicised with news media reporting his findings that “the greenhouse effect has been detected and is changing our climate now.”

end quotes

And the Environmental Defense Fund was gushing praise for Jimmy in the article “Hansen was right: Marking an anniversary by misleading the public” by Ilissa Ocko published July 18, 2018, to wit:

With the thirtieth anniversary of former NASA scientist Jim Hansen’s landmark testimony to Congress on the urgent need to address climate change, numerous articles marked the occasion by demonstrating that his 1988 predictions have proven to be accurate.

end quotes

Which takes us back to the Guardian once more, as follows:

“The Cassandra aspect of his (Jimmy Hansen) life is that he’s cursed to understand and diagnose what’s going on but unable to persuade people to do something about it.”

“We are all raised to believe knowledge is power but Hansen proves the untruth of that slogan.”

“Power is power.”

“Obama was committed to action but couldn’t do much with the Congress he had,” Oreskes said.

“To blame the Democrats and Obama is to misunderstand the political context.”

“There was a huge, organized network that put forward a message of confusion and doubt.”

end quotes

And Roger that, alright!

There was indeed a huge, organized network that put forward a message of confusion and doubt, and its name was and remains the IPCC!

And thanks to the Cape Charles Mirror alone, my little grand daughter is being afforded an opportunity unavailable to her elsewhere to challenge that huge, organized network known as the IPCC that is putting forward the message of confusion and doubt that fuels the climate-change hysteria created by Jimmy Hansen in 1988 when he told a US congressional hearing he could declare “with 99% confidence” that a recent sharp rise in temperatures was a result of human activity.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-236970
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73424
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: R.I.P. AGE OF REASON IN USA

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR March 6, 2020 at 9:41 pm

Paul Plante says :

R.I.P. Age of Reason, indeed, and enter instead the AGE of UN-REASON, or ANTHROPOCENE, a Greek word which translates roughly as AGE of ABSURDITY, which age came into being definitively in December of 2005, when society-at-large in America accepted without question the ruling of now-Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayer, then an appeals court judge on the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, that it was for their own good that a professional engineer qualified as a public health engineer who would not lie to them or deceive them with “scientific falsehoods” or engage in professional misconduct by committing fraudulent acts should be declared “mentally ill and dangerous” for doing so, refusing to condone professional misconduct harmful to the public by other licensed professionals, by the State of New York and consigned to a gulag (state mental hospital) for drug-induced “mind wiping,” which is a true story that happened in the state of New York on 22 August 2001.

And that reality, for reality it now is, and then some, surreal as it has become, in turn takes us back to the Guardian article “Ex-Nasa scientist: 30 years on, world is failing ‘miserably’ to address climate change – James Hansen, who gave a climate warning in 1988 Senate testimony, says real hoax is by leaders claiming to take action” by Oliver Milman in New York @olliemilman on 19 Jun 2018, and Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard academic who studies the history of science. who was quoted in that article, as saying “(P)oor Jim Hansen, he’s a tragic hero, there was a huge, organized network that put forward a message of confusion and doubt,” which comment about “a huge, organized network that put forward a message of confusion and doubt” takes us back to November of 2016, and the district court ruling in Juliana v. USA wherein the Court stated in favor of granting the Juliana plaintiffs the standing the Appeals Court stripped from them in January of this year that “(A)t oral argument, plaintiffs supplied the Court with a timeline documenting purported evidence of defendants’ knowledge of climate change,” and “(T)he timeline, which dates back to 1955, includes the 1988 testimony of Dr. James Hansen before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,” which statement takes us back to June 23, 1988 and what has to be the epitome of a message of confusion and doubt which is found in the Congressional Testimony of Dr. James Hansen of the NASA Goddard Space Institute to the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to wit:

Mr. Chairman and committee members, thank you for the opportunity to present the results of my research on the greenhouse effect which has been carried out with my colleagues at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

The four warmest years, as the Senator mentioned, have all been in the 1980s.

And 1988 so far is so much warmer than 1987, that barring a remarkable and improbable cooling, 1988 will the warmest year on the record.

end quotes

But was that true what Jimmy was saying to the members of the United States Senate on June 23, 1988 about the temperature differences between 1987 and 1988?

Or is that a case of a tragic hero named Jimmy Hanson putting forward a message of confusion and doubt?

For that answer, let’s go to a New York Times article entitled “Global Warmth In ’88 Is Found To Set a Record” by Philip Shabecoff, Special To the New York Times, on Feb. 4, 1989, where we have as follows:

Dr. Phil Jones, a climatologist at East Anglia, said global temperatures rose on average about one degree Fahrenheit since the beginning of the century.

But the scientists added that last year’s warm temperatures appeared to have been linked, at least in part, to natural fluctuations.

end quotes

But whoa, wait a minute, because in his June 23, 1988 Congressional Testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, our Jimmy said thusly:

So with 99 percent confidence we can state that the warming during this time period is a real warming trend.

end quotes

So is Jimmy making things up there?

Is Jimmy being overly dramatic to whip up some hysteria, as he has managed to do, which has gotten his name in the press quite a bit?

Or was Jimmy out and out insane and hysterical when he gave that address?

Let’s go back to the NYT and see if we can glean any more relevant information from that article to help us assess what the answers to those questions might be, to wit:

Last week, scientists from the United States Commerce Department’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that a study of temperature readings for the contiguous 48 states over the last century showed there had been no significant change in average temperature over that period.

end quotes

HUH?

Did I read that right?

Scientists from NOAA said that a study of temperature readings for the contiguous 48 states over the last century showed there had been no significant change in average temperature over that period.

No significant change in average temperature over the last century?

But wait – that was not what Jimmy Hansen was peddling to not only the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on June 23, 1988, but to the world, as well, as we clearly can see from the New York Times article entitled “Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate” by Philip Shabecoff, Special To the New York Times, on June 24, 1988, where we and the candid world were informed as follows:

The earth has been warmer in the first five months of this year than in any comparable period since measurements began 130 years ago, and the higher temperatures can now be attributed to a long-expected global warming trend linked to pollution, a space agency scientist reported today.

Until now, scientists have been cautious about attributing rising global temperatures of recent years to the predicted global warming caused by pollutants in the atmosphere, known as the ”greenhouse effect.”

But today Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration told a Congressional committee that it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere.

end quotes

So, talk about a case of a tragic hero named Jimmy Hanson putting forward a message of confusion and doubt alright!

No wonder poor little Greta Thunberg is so confused and scared!

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-238549
Post Reply