Canada's AGW stooge Stephane Bumbledore Dion, The Disciple of David Suzuki, is still spouting his shifty GreenFear climate socialism. How quaint. Too bad the St.Catharines Standard couldn't be bothered asking their local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley (umm: he's only Ontario's Environment Minister, btw...) about the year passed, and the year in store, and how the world will be destroyed if we don't obey the fearsome climatalarmist commands of Bumbledore!
*
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Heavy snow proves global-warming, except when lack of snow proves climate-change: ya got that?!
Remember, just back in Feb.2010, how the GreenFear TM crowd of global-warming climatalarmists were chortling about this during the Olympics? Funny, then, how they're not now talking about this! Lack of snow in certain regions of B.C. was a highpoint for the smug Greensheviks; to them, an obvious ominous sign of climate catastrophe which could only be stopped by Jim Bradley-style climat-olitical TM socialist solutions. But, now, with heavy snow and avalanche warnings, the GreenFear silence is deafening.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Niagara's Top News Story of 2011: how the St.Catharines Standard aided and abetted Jim Bradley during Niagara's Liberal Summer of C.diff Death
Further to my earlier post:
It's officially a pathetic tragi-comedy: Health care is the top story of the year, the "Newsmaker of the Year", as the Dec.28, 2011 St.Catharines Standard proclaimed; yet of course, local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, whose government created the LHIN's which forced the HIP cuts onto the NHS, was not even mentioned.
What else is new from Niagara's oldest Bradley-butt-wiping rag of record?
Yep: the front-page story in the Dec.28, 2011 Standard (written by "Standard Staff", under the headline "Niagara Health System dominated headlines mostly for wrong reasons") noted that "37 patients with hospital-associated C.difficile infections died" in Niagara...
(...in Bradley's Liberal-run health monopoly; you know, the one Good Ole Jimmy [suddenly] has nothing to do with...!)
...yet ...uh... because Jim Bradley has nothing to with it, the Standard, therefore (...it all makes sense, really...) has never carried an interview with their own secretive local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley about these deaths!!
See: it does makes sense: had a Conservative been the MPP during Niagara's Summer of C.diff Death, the Standard would have been working overtime devoting reams of editions dedicated to the story, scrutinizing its part-and-parcel politics...
(...btw: it wasn't even clear in this Standard story what exactly they meant about the NHS being in the headlines (...mostly their and NTW's headlines...) for the "wrong reasons"; the mysterious "Standard staff" writers did not say what the "right reasons" would have been. The headline just doesn't make sense in context to their story. Over 3 dozen C. diff patients died in Niagara - were we supposed to pretend that this WASN'T newsworthy??)
It's just that easy for Jim Bradley to vanish.
And it's just that easy for the St.Catharines Standard to act as Jim Bradley's enablers; protectively, sensitively, carefully and strategically looking the other way when it comes to analyzing Precious Ole Jim.
Score another wrong-not-righted by Wendy Metcalfe's unofficial Niagara Liberal Propaganda Unit.
(Note: Several years later, we would all be made aware of what this kind of garbage reporting by the St.Catharines Standard was - - - it was revealed to be FAKE NEWS as appeared under the ascendancy of Trump. (The left HATED Trump... attempted to smear and impeach him for FAKE CRIMES even, inspired by lunatics such as Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler and Schumer). But we clearly know that the same category of deception and bias, practised by the same fake news propaganda peddlers, was also evident everywhere in Canada, years before it brought to the public fore in the States. We were subject to fake news in Niagara for YEARS; this propaganda in 2011 was just one tiny sliver of the monumental leftist deception peddled in Canada's press for decades.)
*
...and, notice, that Bolichowski's year-end-story "Bradley sees brighter times ahead", tucked into the Dec.31, 2011 Standard, was not an interview, but simply stenography sans analysis - typical Standard regurgitated stuff, almost election-style friendly fodder, an 'atta-boy' gift of enablement from the Standard to Jimmy. Whatever Ole Brighter Times Jimmy spouted, the Standard gobbled it up.
(ie, this was NOT "Trump's fake news"; this was a typical pre-Trump example of REAL "FAKE NEWS - - just read it: it's right there starin' at your face...
...read the fakery and then see the built-in-bias, the unquestioned "company line" being dutifully spewed in your face in this phony attempt at "journalism"!!
This was not journalism at all, but urinalism; it was a regurgitation of Bradley's tainted Liberal piss; it was 'toe-the-line' stenography and happily-abiding sycophancy; it was what was considered TYPICAL and NORMAL in Niagara for decades.
Despite the utterly phony 'right-wronging / wrong-righting' deceptiveness spouted by Wendy Metcalfe, there was no 'right-wronging / wrong-'righting' attempted!!!
Metcalfe's gang was NOT righting any wrong - - because they DID NOT SEE ANY WRONG!!
THAT is their deception; THAT is their built-in bias. (ie: if a Liberal does any wrong, it's instantly spun and portrayed as being a 'right'!!)
Their mission is to DEFEND THE WRONG; to PAINT THE WRONG AS IF IT WAS A RIGHT {...get it yet??}; to GLORIFY THE WRONG; to MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO. They are tasked to PROTECT the leftist status quo.)
Bolichowski didn't bother asking Jim Bradley how many C. diff deaths could have been prevented in Niagara in 2011, had Bradley's secretive lying Liberals not quashed a public C. difficile inquiry in 2008!
Gosh: Jeff didn't even bother to go off-script and ask Jim Bradley (Ontario's Alberta-hatin' climatalarmist Environment Minister ...oops, pardon... Kyodiot) whether he's a Chiquita or a Dole banana man!
See the Mobil ad near the Jimmy-fawning story?! Ironic placement, eh, considering how Jimmy hates oil! ...and doctors ...and truth...
*
It's officially a pathetic tragi-comedy: Health care is the top story of the year, the "Newsmaker of the Year", as the Dec.28, 2011 St.Catharines Standard proclaimed; yet of course, local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, whose government created the LHIN's which forced the HIP cuts onto the NHS, was not even mentioned.
What else is new from Niagara's oldest Bradley-butt-wiping rag of record?
Yep: the front-page story in the Dec.28, 2011 Standard (written by "Standard Staff", under the headline "Niagara Health System dominated headlines mostly for wrong reasons") noted that "37 patients with hospital-associated C.difficile infections died" in Niagara...
(...in Bradley's Liberal-run health monopoly; you know, the one Good Ole Jimmy [suddenly] has nothing to do with...!)
...yet ...uh... because Jim Bradley has nothing to with it, the Standard, therefore (...it all makes sense, really...) has never carried an interview with their own secretive local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley about these deaths!!
See: it does makes sense: had a Conservative been the MPP during Niagara's Summer of C.diff Death, the Standard would have been working overtime devoting reams of editions dedicated to the story, scrutinizing its part-and-parcel politics...
(...btw: it wasn't even clear in this Standard story what exactly they meant about the NHS being in the headlines (...mostly their and NTW's headlines...) for the "wrong reasons"; the mysterious "Standard staff" writers did not say what the "right reasons" would have been. The headline just doesn't make sense in context to their story. Over 3 dozen C. diff patients died in Niagara - were we supposed to pretend that this WASN'T newsworthy??)
It's just that easy for Jim Bradley to vanish.
And it's just that easy for the St.Catharines Standard to act as Jim Bradley's enablers; protectively, sensitively, carefully and strategically looking the other way when it comes to analyzing Precious Ole Jim.
Score another wrong-not-righted by Wendy Metcalfe's unofficial Niagara Liberal Propaganda Unit.
(Note: Several years later, we would all be made aware of what this kind of garbage reporting by the St.Catharines Standard was - - - it was revealed to be FAKE NEWS as appeared under the ascendancy of Trump. (The left HATED Trump... attempted to smear and impeach him for FAKE CRIMES even, inspired by lunatics such as Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler and Schumer). But we clearly know that the same category of deception and bias, practised by the same fake news propaganda peddlers, was also evident everywhere in Canada, years before it brought to the public fore in the States. We were subject to fake news in Niagara for YEARS; this propaganda in 2011 was just one tiny sliver of the monumental leftist deception peddled in Canada's press for decades.)
*
(ie, this was NOT "Trump's fake news"; this was a typical pre-Trump example of REAL "FAKE NEWS - - just read it: it's right there starin' at your face...
...read the fakery and then see the built-in-bias, the unquestioned "company line" being dutifully spewed in your face in this phony attempt at "journalism"!!
This was not journalism at all, but urinalism; it was a regurgitation of Bradley's tainted Liberal piss; it was 'toe-the-line' stenography and happily-abiding sycophancy; it was what was considered TYPICAL and NORMAL in Niagara for decades.
Despite the utterly phony 'right-wronging / wrong-righting' deceptiveness spouted by Wendy Metcalfe, there was no 'right-wronging / wrong-'righting' attempted!!!
Metcalfe's gang was NOT righting any wrong - - because they DID NOT SEE ANY WRONG!!
THAT is their deception; THAT is their built-in bias. (ie: if a Liberal does any wrong, it's instantly spun and portrayed as being a 'right'!!)
Their mission is to DEFEND THE WRONG; to PAINT THE WRONG AS IF IT WAS A RIGHT {...get it yet??}; to GLORIFY THE WRONG; to MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO. They are tasked to PROTECT the leftist status quo.)
Bolichowski didn't bother asking Jim Bradley how many C. diff deaths could have been prevented in Niagara in 2011, had Bradley's secretive lying Liberals not quashed a public C. difficile inquiry in 2008!
Gosh: Jeff didn't even bother to go off-script and ask Jim Bradley (Ontario's Alberta-hatin' climatalarmist E
See the Mobil ad near the Jimmy-fawning story?! Ironic placement, eh, considering how Jimmy hates oil! ...and doctors ...and truth...
*
Canada's Cagey Climatologist David Phillips teases about climate change
Loved that nice, sustained pile of GreenFear propaganda which was peddled at around 7:18 pm EST, Dec.28, 2011, on Buffalo's 970 AM, on the Gwen Ifill hosted Newshour. Climate change - man made - was not even challenged by those NPR "reporters". This is the kind of cheer-leading, unquestioned, lap-it-up-and-love-it climate fear propaganda which Jim Bradley needs to hear more of in Canada!
Speaking of Good Ole Jimmy - once again, the St.Catharines Standard carried another of those always-funny Cagey Climatologist David 'maybe/maybe not/I dunno' Phillips' weather stories [where some reporter is sent in to decipher what Phillips says, and then try to spin some climate-change innuendo out of it], and once again, Jim Bradley (aka Ontario's Environment Minister!!) was not mentioned.
Ray Spiteri tried that same dance with Phillips a coupla days ago in the Standard; now, in the Dec.28, 2011 Standard, Don Fraser was sent in to do his best to somehow prove the fearsome existence of man-made climate change by cobbling together a string of David 'it's a crapshoot of fits and fickles' Phillips' scat-like climatological observations.
Yet, dammit - as Spiteri had found out - Cagey Climatologist Phillips came so close with his climate-fear innuendo, but couldn't actually give Fraser the smoking climate money shot, which would prove once and for all the existence of man-made climate change (or 'global-warming', or 'unprecedented-extreme-weather-events', or whatever the GreenFear industry's euphemistic-terminology-du jour for climate-socialism is).
Phillips teased and toyed with Fraser and led Fraser to the loquacious brink of climactic climatic release, but, dammit - pulled out just shy of actually saying that the Planet is in Peril, and that Jim Bradley is right, and that the Earth will be flooded as it dries up, and that the polar bears will drown as they're frying...
No, Fraser didn't get satisfaction from Canada's Cunningly Cagey Climatologist David Phillips. Fraser and his frustrated readers were left blueballed and breathless, having come so close to proving their socialist doomsday climate nirvana.
We don't even know whether Fraser had even bothered to come right out and ask Phillips outright for the definitive proof of man-made climate change; at least Spiteri made it look as if he had begged. But, although both Fraser and Spiteri dealt with the Cagey Climatologist, they also both completely ignored the One Man In All Of Liberal Ontario Who Knows All About Climate: Good Ole Jim Jimmy J.J. James Bradley!!
As with Spiteri, and countless previous lemmings who were sent to uphold the climate fear tradition, Fraser also did not dare bother to approach Climate Change GreenFear Chief Jim Bradley for the definitive proof of AGW. Strangely, Fraser didn't bother to provide readers with any reaction from Jim Bradley to Phillips' comments!
Perhaps the Standard's boss Wendy Metcalfe saw no wrongs here which needed righting, and ordered reporters such as Fraser not to contact Ontario's Environment Minister Jim Bradley, when her newspaper is writing stories desperately trying to peddle climate fear.
Or, maybe these "reporters" are protecting Jim Bradley on their own, and Wendy doesn't mind.
*
Speaking of Good Ole Jimmy - once again, the St.Catharines Standard carried another of those always-funny Cagey Climatologist David 'maybe/maybe not/I dunno' Phillips' weather stories [where some reporter is sent in to decipher what Phillips says, and then try to spin some climate-change innuendo out of it], and once again, Jim Bradley (aka Ontario's Environment Minister!!) was not mentioned.
Ray Spiteri tried that same dance with Phillips a coupla days ago in the Standard; now, in the Dec.28, 2011 Standard, Don Fraser was sent in to do his best to somehow prove the fearsome existence of man-made climate change by cobbling together a string of David 'it's a crapshoot of fits and fickles' Phillips' scat-like climatological observations.
Yet, dammit - as Spiteri had found out - Cagey Climatologist Phillips came so close with his climate-fear innuendo, but couldn't actually give Fraser the smoking climate money shot, which would prove once and for all the existence of man-made climate change (or 'global-warming', or 'unprecedented-extreme-weather-events', or whatever the GreenFear industry's euphemistic-terminology-du jour for climate-socialism is).
Phillips teased and toyed with Fraser and led Fraser to the loquacious brink of climactic climatic release, but, dammit - pulled out just shy of actually saying that the Planet is in Peril, and that Jim Bradley is right, and that the Earth will be flooded as it dries up, and that the polar bears will drown as they're frying...
No, Fraser didn't get satisfaction from Canada's Cunningly Cagey Climatologist David Phillips. Fraser and his frustrated readers were left blueballed and breathless, having come so close to proving their socialist doomsday climate nirvana.
We don't even know whether Fraser had even bothered to come right out and ask Phillips outright for the definitive proof of man-made climate change; at least Spiteri made it look as if he had begged. But, although both Fraser and Spiteri dealt with the Cagey Climatologist, they also both completely ignored the One Man In All Of Liberal Ontario Who Knows All About Climate: Good Ole Jim Jimmy J.J. James Bradley!!
As with Spiteri, and countless previous lemmings who were sent to uphold the climate fear tradition, Fraser also did not dare bother to approach Climate Change GreenFear Chief Jim Bradley for the definitive proof of AGW. Strangely, Fraser didn't bother to provide readers with any reaction from Jim Bradley to Phillips' comments!
Perhaps the Standard's boss Wendy Metcalfe saw no wrongs here which needed righting, and ordered reporters such as Fraser not to contact Ontario's Environment Minister Jim Bradley, when her newspaper is writing stories desperately trying to peddle climate fear.
Or, maybe these "reporters" are protecting Jim Bradley on their own, and Wendy doesn't mind.
*
Health-care status-quo is working just fine for secretive Liberal Jim Bradley!
Further to this previous post...
Fred G. Peet wrote in "Health-care status quo not working" (National Post, Dec.28, 2011):
"Re: In Defence Of Public Health Care, letter to the editor, Dec. 23.
In defending the current one-payer medical system in Canada, Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, talks about medical care for the poor. However, she avoids mentioning the person who has carefully put money aside for a medical rainy day only to find that they are unable to spend it on their own care when that rainy day arrives, thanks to the Canada Health Act. We thus have the absurd situation that a person can spend their own money on health care for their dog or cat but not for themselves.
Second, she claims that choice means fend for yourself. She avoids raising the possibility that a government monopoly may not be the most efficient way of delivering health care, even within a singlepayer system.
Lastly, she refers to medical public policy being based on research and evidence. She ignores the public policy that reduced the number of student seats in medical schools in the mid-1990s, leading to today's current doctor shortage.
It is time to fix the Canadian medical system, in spite of the views of Ms. Silas, and that fixing can begin with an overhaul of the Canada Health Act."
*
The health monopoly's workin' fine, if ya ask Ontario Liberal MPP Jim Bradley [...well, ya gotta find Secretive Ole Jimmy first, though...]
Why, 37 patients died during two C.difficile outbreaks in Bradley's own region, yet Ole Jim had nothin' to say about it!!
And better yet, no-one from the press even bothered to ask Jimmy about it!!
How about that, eh?!!
The health-care status-quo sure is working for Jim... bigtime... with blindfolds on...
*
Fred G. Peet wrote in "Health-care status quo not working" (National Post, Dec.28, 2011):
"Re: In Defence Of Public Health Care, letter to the editor, Dec. 23.
In defending the current one-payer medical system in Canada, Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, talks about medical care for the poor. However, she avoids mentioning the person who has carefully put money aside for a medical rainy day only to find that they are unable to spend it on their own care when that rainy day arrives, thanks to the Canada Health Act. We thus have the absurd situation that a person can spend their own money on health care for their dog or cat but not for themselves.
Second, she claims that choice means fend for yourself. She avoids raising the possibility that a government monopoly may not be the most efficient way of delivering health care, even within a singlepayer system.
Lastly, she refers to medical public policy being based on research and evidence. She ignores the public policy that reduced the number of student seats in medical schools in the mid-1990s, leading to today's current doctor shortage.
It is time to fix the Canadian medical system, in spite of the views of Ms. Silas, and that fixing can begin with an overhaul of the Canada Health Act."
*
The health monopoly's workin' fine, if ya ask Ontario Liberal MPP Jim Bradley [...well, ya gotta find Secretive Ole Jimmy first, though...]
Why, 37 patients died during two C.difficile outbreaks in Bradley's own region, yet Ole Jim had nothin' to say about it!!
And better yet, no-one from the press even bothered to ask Jimmy about it!!
How about that, eh?!!
The health-care status-quo sure is working for Jim... bigtime... with blindfolds on...
*
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Looks like Ontario's Environment Minister Jim Bradley has nothing to do with the environment!
Interesting article by Greg Van Moorsel in the Dec.27, 2011 St.Catharines Standard, "Ontario's dirt hides behind oilsands', which points out that McGuinty's Liberals should be thankful that Alberta's oil industry is supporting Ontario economically, while at the same time also taking the spotlight away from McGuinty-run Ontario's own abysmal environmental record (as Ontario's environment commissioner Gord Miller had recently reported)
Despite adopting a GreenFear-fallacy within his own story (peddling unsubstantiated links to "climate-warming greenhouse gases") Van Moorsel nevertheless makes some good points about how Alberta gets vilified, yet Ontario gets a free environmental pass.
The astounding thing about this report - coming as it does from Sun Media's own national comment editor, and appearing in Wendy Metcalfe's notoriously faux-'wrong-righting' St.Catharines Standard - is that - once again! - there was no analysis of, no comments from, no reactions from, no mention whatsoever about St.Catharines Liberal MPP Jim James J.J. Bradley - who is Ontario's Environment Minister!!!
There was nothing at all in this story from or about Jim Bradley - a TWO-TIME ONTARIO LIBERAL environment minister, no less!!!!
Why was Good Ole Jim Bradley, the Liberal Kyodiot who practically gave birth to Kyoto in Ontario a decade ago, ever-so-conveniently missing in this report?!
Don't Wendy Metcalfe or Greg Van Moorsel know who Jim Bradley is, or what he's (not) done??! hahaha.
And Kinsella calls Sun Media 'right-wing'!! hahaha
*
Despite adopting a GreenFear-fallacy within his own story (peddling unsubstantiated links to "climate-warming greenhouse gases") Van Moorsel nevertheless makes some good points about how Alberta gets vilified, yet Ontario gets a free environmental pass.
The astounding thing about this report - coming as it does from Sun Media's own national comment editor, and appearing in Wendy Metcalfe's notoriously faux-'wrong-righting' St.Catharines Standard - is that - once again! - there was no analysis of, no comments from, no reactions from, no mention whatsoever about St.Catharines Liberal MPP Jim James J.J. Bradley - who is Ontario's Environment Minister!!!
There was nothing at all in this story from or about Jim Bradley - a TWO-TIME ONTARIO LIBERAL environment minister, no less!!!!
Why was Good Ole Jim Bradley, the Liberal Kyodiot who practically gave birth to Kyoto in Ontario a decade ago, ever-so-conveniently missing in this report?!
Don't Wendy Metcalfe or Greg Van Moorsel know who Jim Bradley is, or what he's (not) done??! hahaha.
And Kinsella calls Sun Media 'right-wing'!! hahaha
*
Monday, December 26, 2011
The St.Catharines Standard peddles more GreenFear
Of course, Wendy Metcalfe's wrong righters at the Standard printed Burnett's column without any scrutiny regarding the accompanying photo's outrageous claims.
One great GreenFear doozy was the scary photo of the Earth in some kind of fearsome brown tinge, with this classic smelly 'piece of Justin Trudeau' caption: "Between global warming and rapid change in climate, we are seeing a rapid alteration of our biosphere alongside climatic catastrophes".
Now, that's some Good Ole GreenFear-mongering for you: scared yet, that Armageddon's gonna getcha?!
Read that ridiculous St.Catharines Standard bullsh!t once more, just for fun!! It's almost as if Wendy's Standard is trying to pull off a parody here, and that the fear mongering hyperbolic captions below the photos are actually a spoof, not supposed to be real!!!
It's funny, because Wendy Metcalfe's St.Catharines Standard editors never really provide any evidence to justify the GreenFear which they have just published. Just saying it is proof in itself: after all, AGW is 'all settled', so, how can anyone question it?!!!
If one reads Burnett's story, it's not at all clear who actually makes this claim: Burnett's column doesn't actually make the claim which accompanies the story's photo. Burnett writes of subject Larry Hall mentioning "climate change", but nowhere in the story does Burnett actually write that Hall himself believes it; Burnett reports Hall only saying that others - those who have been GreenFeared into buying his disaster shelters - do; and, Burnett shows us that Hall is more than happy to profit from their fears.
Burnett, in the body of his story, doesn't actually peddle the doomsday scenario, yet, he doesn't question it, either: so it is not clear who, then, actually made the claims in the photo captions which accompany the Standard's story! Did QMI agency writer Burnett also choose the photos and write the captions, or were these inserted and editorialized by others?
Will Standard boss Metcalfe bother to explain why the photo-caption claims which came alongside the story, were not actually part of the story? Jim Bradley, Stephane Dion, and David Suzuki salute you, Wendy.
Wendy could have assigned some other reporter - maybe Spiteri - to examine the claims attached to Burnett's story, or the Standard's manipulative editorialization of Burnett's story, by referring to Ontario's own Blessed Environment Minister Jim Bradley, for final confirmation that the planet is indeed in 'catastrophic biospherical' meltdown, as Wendy Metcalfe's Standard has actually reported.
Bradley, Ontario's Environmental Sage, could have easily - once and for all - proven that 'the Planet is in Peril', and, that the Standard is not peddling a smelly 'piece of Justin Trudeau', but is printing true scientific facts: Jim Bradley, after all, knows all about the... ahem... reality of global warming.
Gawrsh: all Wendy - or Thane Burnett, or Spiteri - had to do, was call Good Ole Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, who is always available (...hahaha...) and is always eager (...bwaahaha...) to publicly show the definitive scientific evidence, which only he knows, which proves anthropogenic global warming and climate change!! Why wasn't Environment Minister Bradley consulted?!
Although 2011 'should have been the end' of the St.Catharines Standard's GreenFear peddling, it's apparent that the end of Kyoto has not brought about an end to the Standard's penchant for climate deception.
*
Jim Bradley's non-reaction to auditor McCarter's report
Have the St.Catharines Standard's Wendy Metcalfe or Niagara This Week's Mike Williscraft bothered - yet - to ask local Niagara Liberal MPP Jim Bradley for his comments about this CBC story, where the "Opposition suggests Ontario's Liberal government may be using a community grant program as a slush fund to reward friends and supporters, just like it did with grants for multicultural organizations four years ago."
Scandal... what scandal? Questionable Trillium grants? How dare ya ask secretive Ole Jim Bradley about Liberal accountability? Righting-wrongs... huh? Why should anyone demand that Liberal Jim Bradley provide his detailed local response to the auditor's report?! What nerve...
*
Scandal... what scandal? Questionable Trillium grants? How dare ya ask secretive Ole Jim Bradley about Liberal accountability? Righting-wrongs... huh? Why should anyone demand that Liberal Jim Bradley provide his detailed local response to the auditor's report?! What nerve...
*
Who is responsible for Tommy Douglas' negligence?
Further to this previous post...
Sidney Braun wrote in "National spirit not part of health care" (National Post, Dec.24, 2011):
Re: In Defence Of Public Health Care, letter to the editor, Dec. 23. Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, fails to recognize her own "evidence-empty" (and very tired) arguments and alludes to facts and reasons, but lists none. Funding for health care is already divided between the public, insurance and private/corporate purse. Health care isn't about national spirit - it is about delivering quality care to those who need it. The problem is not in the funding but rather in the delivery, which is due to lack of accountability. Publicly funded and privately delivered health care is what we need to really ensure that quality care in a timely fashion is indeed provided for those who need it. If publicly funded and privately delivered care costs less, why is that not the Canadian way?
*
Canada's reactionary political enforcers of status-quo health-care, and their sycophantic self-appointed higher-moral-standard-bearing symbionts, have a very comfortable monopoly they insist on protecting and propagating.
Isn't the argument now really about private-parallel, ie, privately-funded/privately delivered , NOT about publicly-funded/-privately-delivered ?!
The latter is essentially what we already have now.
This is about going beyond monopolist, state-controlled, single-payer health-care; it is about introducing privately-funded/privately delivered health care, in other words: non-state-funded health care, parallel with the state's public (but non-monopoly) care.
But it's not surprising that the status-quo-enforcing monopolists are still agitating even against relatively innocuous improvements within the publicly-funded/privately-delivered category.
Let's recall that reactionary Liberals even demonized their own health minister Pierre Pettigrew for daring to suggest that provinces in Canada should be allowed to mildly experiment with health care in the publicly-funded/privately-delivered realm!! (see here, pg.17-20) And the same reactionary leftists also demonized John Tory for essentially saying the same thing.
Neither Silas, nor Liberal monopolists such as Deb Matthews, nor Jim Bradley, nor Kim Craitor, have yet explained who is accountable for the deaths of dozens of C. diff victims in Niagara's McGuinty-run-public-health-monopoly this year.
No one's accountable when the state's monopolists are in charge.
*
see also here
*
Sidney Braun wrote in "National spirit not part of health care" (National Post, Dec.24, 2011):
Re: In Defence Of Public Health Care, letter to the editor, Dec. 23. Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, fails to recognize her own "evidence-empty" (and very tired) arguments and alludes to facts and reasons, but lists none. Funding for health care is already divided between the public, insurance and private/corporate purse. Health care isn't about national spirit - it is about delivering quality care to those who need it. The problem is not in the funding but rather in the delivery, which is due to lack of accountability. Publicly funded and privately delivered health care is what we need to really ensure that quality care in a timely fashion is indeed provided for those who need it. If publicly funded and privately delivered care costs less, why is that not the Canadian way?
*
Canada's reactionary political enforcers of status-quo health-care, and their sycophantic self-appointed higher-moral-standard-bearing symbionts, have a very comfortable monopoly they insist on protecting and propagating.
Isn't the argument now really about private-parallel, ie, privately-funded/privately delivered , NOT about publicly-funded/-privately-delivered ?!
The latter is essentially what we already have now.
This is about going beyond monopolist, state-controlled, single-payer health-care; it is about introducing privately-funded/privately delivered health care, in other words: non-state-funded health care, parallel with the state's public (but non-monopoly) care.
But it's not surprising that the status-quo-enforcing monopolists are still agitating even against relatively innocuous improvements within the publicly-funded/privately-delivered category.
Let's recall that reactionary Liberals even demonized their own health minister Pierre Pettigrew for daring to suggest that provinces in Canada should be allowed to mildly experiment with health care in the publicly-funded/privately-delivered realm!! (see here, pg.17-20) And the same reactionary leftists also demonized John Tory for essentially saying the same thing.
Neither Silas, nor Liberal monopolists such as Deb Matthews, nor Jim Bradley, nor Kim Craitor, have yet explained who is accountable for the deaths of dozens of C. diff victims in Niagara's McGuinty-run-public-health-monopoly this year.
No one's accountable when the state's monopolists are in charge.
*
see also here
*
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Tommy Douglas responsible for C.diff patient deaths
Lorne Gunter wrote in "Leaving Canada's health care myths behind" (National Post, Dec.21, 2011):
I was reading a fascinating piece on Canadians’ newfound national confidence in Maclean’s on Monday when a story moved on the newswires reporting that six of 10 provinces are unhappy with federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s new health-care transfer plans. It may be a bit of a stretch, but I think the two are related.
The contrast between the two shows how ordinary Canadians have escaped the insularity and smugness that have driven our elites’ image of Canada for at least four decades. No longer do we find it necessary to define ourselves through comparison with other countries, notably the United States, or by constantly reassuring ourselves that being a “soft power” makes us morally and intellectually superior.
Nicholas Kohler’s Maclean’s article claims Canadians are among the most optimistic people in the world about the future of their nation; 86% of us believe Canada is the greatest country in the world, 87% that it is the best place in the world in which to raise kids.
In a way, that’s not surprising. Majorities in most countries like to think their nation is best. But what makes it remarkable is how our sanguinity stacks up against that of other countries’ residents. Just 61% of Americans think the United States is the best place to bring up children, while 50% of Brits believe Canada is a better place for families than the U.K.
And while just 42% us of believe Canada’s best days lie in the future, rather than the past, that is considerably higher than the 36% of Americans who believe the same. Fifty-eight percent of the British are convinced their glory days are gone.
This new pride has been emerging for a while, but I think it broke through in a big way at the Winter Olympics in Vancouver in 2010. Athletically, we nearly won the thing outright. But it was culturally where we truly shone. The performers at the opening and closing ceremonies, and at various venues, were all world-class and all Canadian. But they didn’t make a big deal about being Canadian. They let their talent do the boasting.
The street parties were hip, the organization second-to-none. And we, as hosts, were neither apologetic about our success nor sneering about how this showed our way of doing things is ethically purer. We simply welcomed the world in, offered guests as good a party as they would find anywhere, then joined them in the fun.
That’s the new Canadian spirit.
Now contrast that with the way six of 10 provincial finance ministers reacted to Mr. Flaherty’s plan to solidify federal health-care transfers through 2024. The federal Finance Minister announced Monday that the federal government would continue to increase its annual health-care transfers to the provinces by 6% a year until 2017. By that year, Ottawa will be shipping the provinces about $38-billion annually to help pay for doctors, nurses, hospitals and medical equipment. Thereafter, the increases would be tied to economic growth (currently about 4%), but will never fall below 3%, no matter how bad the economy gets.
Admittedly, Ottawa sprang this “deal” on provincial governments without warning. The current 10-year health funding arrangement runs out in 2014 and the provinces had expected to have until then to make their case for more money. Mr. Flaherty and the Harper government were eager to prevent a lot of drama and political grandstanding, so they short-circuited the process.
Manitoba NDP Finance Minister Stan Struthers whined: “This is not fair, it is un-Canadian.” His Ontario counterpart, Dwight Duncan, mewled that Ottawa’s plan “destabilizes the federation” and puts at risk “access to quality health care, from sea to sea to sea, in French and English.” (Funny. I thought the point of the health-care system was to make Canadians well, not to promote bilingualism.)
Clearly many of our politicians haven’t caught on to the new confidence and independence most ordinary Canadians are feeling. Having emerged from the shadow of the United States, we no longer feel the need to define ourselves as a nation by claiming our health care is morally superior to theirs.
Provincial politicians, though, seem mired in the notion that our single-payer system is sacred. The only solution they can imagine for its shortcomings is more money from Ottawa, when what is really needed is for them to move on. Take the cash Mr. Flaherty is offering, experiment with new delivery models, permit Canadians greater health care choice and get with the new national spirit.
*
In response to Gunter's above story, Linda Silas wrote "In defense of public health care" (Dec.23, 2011, National Post):
Re: Leaving Canada's Health-Care Myths Behind, Lorne Gunter, Dec. 21.
Lorne Gunter accuses provincial politicians of wanting to keep the single-payer health-care system for no particular reason. I am so tired of evidence-empty arguments calling for more corporate involvement in health care. Let's debate the merits of a single-payer public provider versus a parallel for-profit, based on fact and reason.
The national spirit that created medicare is one of a caring society, so that the sick and the poor do not have to worry that they will not get timely quality care because their health-care provider is working at the rich person's hospital.
Choice means fend for yourself and since when has that been our national spirit or even an option for those who want to see public policy based on research and evidence?
*
We're tired of an unaccountable Tommy Douglas recklessly staggering around Canada, killing patients at will, while forcing them into Silas's single-payer socialist nirvana. Silas isn't talking of 'public' health care, as the headline suggests, she is propagandizing about monopoly health care. Leftists like to use the term 'public', as it doesn't sound so authoritarian, though, of course, it is, seeing as it is being used as an euphemism for no-choice.
The public should be entitled to the health care of their choice.
Silas trots out the ole 'national spirit' canard (another example of Keith Martin's noted head-in-the-sand tactic) and can find no 'corporate reason' to show why Tommy Douglas' zombie killed some 40 C.diff patients in Niagara, despite all the phony promises, all the deceptive research, all the false assurances, all the incompetent unaccountability, in Niagara's 'poor people's' monopoly hospitals, run by monopolists Jim Bradley and Kim Craitor.
It's as if patients must first shove the Constitution and the Canada Health Act in front of the faces of these despotic agents of Tommy Douglas, for them to see that they have no right to force a statist health monopoly upon the public.
Choice does mean choice - but Silas has no idea of the concept: Silas' status-quo is despotism; is the demonization of choice; is the absence of choice; is forced dependence on the state, mandated by the state.
That's exactly what statist Liberals Jim Bradley and Kim Craitor want in Niagara, and exactly why - when their monopolist health charade goes haywire, and when they no can no longer slough off the blame on "harris" boogeymen, or on some fictitious 'privatization', or on some dreaded "Americanization" red-herring - they simply vanish with their rhetoric while Tommy's dead continue to pile up in Niagara.
Yeh... that's the ticket: Ole Tommy did it.
*
see also here; here
*
I was reading a fascinating piece on Canadians’ newfound national confidence in Maclean’s on Monday when a story moved on the newswires reporting that six of 10 provinces are unhappy with federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s new health-care transfer plans. It may be a bit of a stretch, but I think the two are related.
The contrast between the two shows how ordinary Canadians have escaped the insularity and smugness that have driven our elites’ image of Canada for at least four decades. No longer do we find it necessary to define ourselves through comparison with other countries, notably the United States, or by constantly reassuring ourselves that being a “soft power” makes us morally and intellectually superior.
Nicholas Kohler’s Maclean’s article claims Canadians are among the most optimistic people in the world about the future of their nation; 86% of us believe Canada is the greatest country in the world, 87% that it is the best place in the world in which to raise kids.
In a way, that’s not surprising. Majorities in most countries like to think their nation is best. But what makes it remarkable is how our sanguinity stacks up against that of other countries’ residents. Just 61% of Americans think the United States is the best place to bring up children, while 50% of Brits believe Canada is a better place for families than the U.K.
And while just 42% us of believe Canada’s best days lie in the future, rather than the past, that is considerably higher than the 36% of Americans who believe the same. Fifty-eight percent of the British are convinced their glory days are gone.
This new pride has been emerging for a while, but I think it broke through in a big way at the Winter Olympics in Vancouver in 2010. Athletically, we nearly won the thing outright. But it was culturally where we truly shone. The performers at the opening and closing ceremonies, and at various venues, were all world-class and all Canadian. But they didn’t make a big deal about being Canadian. They let their talent do the boasting.
The street parties were hip, the organization second-to-none. And we, as hosts, were neither apologetic about our success nor sneering about how this showed our way of doing things is ethically purer. We simply welcomed the world in, offered guests as good a party as they would find anywhere, then joined them in the fun.
That’s the new Canadian spirit.
Now contrast that with the way six of 10 provincial finance ministers reacted to Mr. Flaherty’s plan to solidify federal health-care transfers through 2024. The federal Finance Minister announced Monday that the federal government would continue to increase its annual health-care transfers to the provinces by 6% a year until 2017. By that year, Ottawa will be shipping the provinces about $38-billion annually to help pay for doctors, nurses, hospitals and medical equipment. Thereafter, the increases would be tied to economic growth (currently about 4%), but will never fall below 3%, no matter how bad the economy gets.
Admittedly, Ottawa sprang this “deal” on provincial governments without warning. The current 10-year health funding arrangement runs out in 2014 and the provinces had expected to have until then to make their case for more money. Mr. Flaherty and the Harper government were eager to prevent a lot of drama and political grandstanding, so they short-circuited the process.
Manitoba NDP Finance Minister Stan Struthers whined: “This is not fair, it is un-Canadian.” His Ontario counterpart, Dwight Duncan, mewled that Ottawa’s plan “destabilizes the federation” and puts at risk “access to quality health care, from sea to sea to sea, in French and English.” (Funny. I thought the point of the health-care system was to make Canadians well, not to promote bilingualism.)
Clearly many of our politicians haven’t caught on to the new confidence and independence most ordinary Canadians are feeling. Having emerged from the shadow of the United States, we no longer feel the need to define ourselves as a nation by claiming our health care is morally superior to theirs.
Provincial politicians, though, seem mired in the notion that our single-payer system is sacred. The only solution they can imagine for its shortcomings is more money from Ottawa, when what is really needed is for them to move on. Take the cash Mr. Flaherty is offering, experiment with new delivery models, permit Canadians greater health care choice and get with the new national spirit.
*
In response to Gunter's above story, Linda Silas wrote "In defense of public health care" (Dec.23, 2011, National Post):
Re: Leaving Canada's Health-Care Myths Behind, Lorne Gunter, Dec. 21.
Lorne Gunter accuses provincial politicians of wanting to keep the single-payer health-care system for no particular reason. I am so tired of evidence-empty arguments calling for more corporate involvement in health care. Let's debate the merits of a single-payer public provider versus a parallel for-profit, based on fact and reason.
The national spirit that created medicare is one of a caring society, so that the sick and the poor do not have to worry that they will not get timely quality care because their health-care provider is working at the rich person's hospital.
Choice means fend for yourself and since when has that been our national spirit or even an option for those who want to see public policy based on research and evidence?
*
We're tired of an unaccountable Tommy Douglas recklessly staggering around Canada, killing patients at will, while forcing them into Silas's single-payer socialist nirvana. Silas isn't talking of 'public' health care, as the headline suggests, she is propagandizing about monopoly health care. Leftists like to use the term 'public', as it doesn't sound so authoritarian, though, of course, it is, seeing as it is being used as an euphemism for no-choice.
The public should be entitled to the health care of their choice.
Silas trots out the ole 'national spirit' canard (another example of Keith Martin's noted head-in-the-sand tactic) and can find no 'corporate reason' to show why Tommy Douglas' zombie killed some 40 C.diff patients in Niagara, despite all the phony promises, all the deceptive research, all the false assurances, all the incompetent unaccountability, in Niagara's 'poor people's' monopoly hospitals, run by monopolists Jim Bradley and Kim Craitor.
It's as if patients must first shove the Constitution and the Canada Health Act in front of the faces of these despotic agents of Tommy Douglas, for them to see that they have no right to force a statist health monopoly upon the public.
Choice does mean choice - but Silas has no idea of the concept: Silas' status-quo is despotism; is the demonization of choice; is the absence of choice; is forced dependence on the state, mandated by the state.
That's exactly what statist Liberals Jim Bradley and Kim Craitor want in Niagara, and exactly why - when their monopolist health charade goes haywire, and when they no can no longer slough off the blame on "harris" boogeymen, or on some fictitious 'privatization', or on some dreaded "Americanization" red-herring - they simply vanish with their rhetoric while Tommy's dead continue to pile up in Niagara.
Yeh... that's the ticket: Ole Tommy did it.
*
see also here; here
*
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Say whaaat? Environment Canada climatologist David Phillips can't prove "climate change"?
Looks as if Ray Spiteri (in the Dec.22, 2011 St.Catharines Standard story "White Christmas? Dream on") engaged Environment Canada's senior climatologist David Phillips to determine whether a not-yet-snowy December in Niagara is proof of "climate change".
Spiteri reported Phillips' reply: ""Climate Change? Could be" said Phillips "We don't know what it is.""
Pardon?! "Could be" climate change???
"We don't know" ???
Yikes... that's probably not the answer which the GreenFear-mongering St.Catharines Standard was really hoping for!! hahaha
[...see some of my favourite Cagey Climatologist David Phillips stories here; here; here; here !]
Spiteri didn't bother to ask Phillips about the 'toxicity to The Planet' of the heat-trapping water-vapour cloud which Niagara Falls has been constantly releasing for some 12,000 years! [Whaaaaat? Whazzzat 'bout? Whaddaya mean..?]
Why didn't Spiteri or his Standard editors also provide readers with Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's response to Phillips' "we don't know" answer, about climate change??
Did Spiteri even bother to ask Niagara's Greatest GreenFear-monger, Jim 'Kyodiot' Bradley, who, by the way, is Ontario's Environment Minister?! You'd think that Bradley would have a completely opposite point of view than Phillips on the matter!
Jim Bradley and his entire Liberal party believe that the causes of, the existence of, and the political solutions to, the issue of "climate change" HAVE ALL BEEN SETTLED!!! Spiteri surely knows about the Liberals' GreenFear peddling, doesn't he?!
Bradley personally claims that man made climate change/global warming is real, and, obviously, Bradley's been blabbing that way for at least twenty years. Of course, Bradley has never provided any specific scientific basis for his claims, going back to at least 1991. The St.Catharines Standard, meanwhile, has gladly never asked. [see: Liberal MPP Jim Bradley shoots crap]
Bradley most certainly claims to believe that he knows what climate change is - though strangely, a secretive Jim Bradley has never publicly revealed his supporting 'scientific basis' for his climate change beliefs - which he clearly must have already had twenty years ago!
Reporter Ray Spiteri had the opportune time to ask Liberal hack MPP Jim Bradley all about his Liberal global warming AGW "evidence";
to ask all about ClimateGate (one and two);
to ask all about the Mann-made hockey stick climate hoax;
to ask all about the dismantling in Durban of Bradley's GreenFear weapon Kyoto, and why Bradley (McGuinty's supposed environment minister) did nothing about it; and... oh, yeah...
to ask all about Phillips' 'we don't know' answer about climate change!!
Spiteri ASKED NONE OF THAT!!!
Conveniently, the biased wrong-righters at the St.Catharines Standard only brought us half the story, if that. (...an example of what would become more clearly known as "FAKE NEWS" after Trump was elected in 2016)
There are a lot of other GreenFear-mongers in Niagara - why didn't Spiteri talk to any of them, either, so they could, once and for all, prove that Phillips is just 'full of steamy Justin Trudeau sh!t'?
*
Let's move forward to 2016, to yet ANOTHER in a long string of pathetic instances where David Phillips happily pops up in some alarmist climate-change propaganda piece, spouting what amounts to essentially pseudo-scientific baffle-gab.
There was the piece of hagiograhy in the Jan.17, 2016 Toronto Red Star where Amy Dempsey fawningly writes:
There is a pretension to uphold here, which would not hold up under scrutiny. Best for the media just to play along with the Cagey Tango, and NOT ask for AGW specifics; beat around the bush all ya want, conflate this with that, throw in some homespun homilies - just DON'T ask Canada's Senior Climatologist for the Chadwickian "definitive" evidence of AGW. The hoax itself must not be challenged.
And Amy skillfully abides - deflect, peddle innuendo, slime Harper, but DO NOT ask the real questions!!
What a heroic effort to add to the FAKE NEWS gallery!
Another example of classic GreenFear crap appeared in Joseph Brean's Dec. 7, 2016 National Post story:
"...Environment Canada’s senior meteorologist ...{note: some some reason, Phillips was referred to as a 'meterologist' in this NP story, yet in other past publications he was referred to as 'senior climatologist'...} David Phillips said the main effect of this increasingly moist warm air is that when it rains, more falls in less time, as in the kind of deluge Phillips called a "Texas gullywasher"...
Canada is second coldest and first snowiest country in the world, so it is hard to convince Canadians that climate change “has some evil to it,” Phillips said. Many simply look fondly to a future of milder winters and longer summers. A bit of flooding might seem like a small price to pay.
So, there you are:
the Jim "Liberal Gullywasher Of Bullshit" Bradley Scientific School Of Floodier Floods And Droughtier Droughts... Now MORE STEAMIER and MORE CRAPPIER than ever!
There you have it: the National Post reporter Brean DID NOT ask David Phillips to provide actual specific evidence of AGW.
Instead - as many other reporters have similarly done with Cagey Climatologist David Phillips in the past - the National Post simply fear-mongered and spread fake news about climate-change, using David Phillips' silly, homey - but ultimately non-substantive - pontifications as a 'legitimizing' cover.
The Cagey Climatologist Fan Club just loves Phillips.
Let's continue with Cagey's Climate Saga:
In a Sheena Goodyear story written Dec. 7, 2016, the CBC happily, obligingly published an outright lie with their deceptive, GreenFear-laden headline "The weather outside is frightful thanks to climate change and the polar vortex", (scary eh?! - apparently, Canada never had cold and snow before...umm... climate change...)
The CBC, naturally, had to run to the Cagey Climatologist for a bit'o'GreenFear-mongering:
"... "Instead of a bungee cord, it looks like more of a roller-coaster. It dips and dives. It kind of goes up over British Columbia and then dives down across the Prairies down to the United States and then comes swooping up towards eastern Canada," he says.
Here we are at the end of 2016 - yet, the media continue their darling little GreenFear dance; they are SELF-'MUZZLING'; conspiring together NOT to actually confront the 'climate change' charade which they both dance around, and sadly, help perpetuate. It seems like an unspoken don't ask/don't tell arrangement - the media doesn't ask what Phillips can't (won't?) answer; Phillips happily abides, spouting cagey weather homilies and dire innuendo, but never really addressing the elephant in the room: providing evidence that "climate change" is "man made".
After hundreds of interviews over the years, by hundreds of writers: where's David Phillips' defense - or repudiation - of the meme (which Justin Trudeau now repeats) that 'man-made climate change' is a fact??
"It’s not as if winter is over by a long shot,” Phillips said. “We’ve just hit the halfway point, but the good news is ... the flow seems to be coming more from the Pacific than the Arctic.”
These unsubstantiated claims you often hear in the media that 'science is muzzled' are themselves regurgitations of a phony meme, still constantly repeated in Green Bolshevik echo chambers; y'know, 'Harper muzzled scientists'; 'Trump muzzles science' etc.
Yet, when was 'science' exactly muzzled??? No one has ever asked the politicians who ought to know - such as Canada's and Ontario's Liberal, for example!!
There again is the falsity of the Green Lie; Liberals in power in Canada - such as Jim Bradley - get away with peddling climate bullshit without ever being held to account by a complicit media!
The media set the tone to ease in the Green Fear agenda years ago. The media has acted as the protectors for the policies for which there is no scientific basis, They spread the meme that 'science is being muzzled' - YET, they also spread the meme that 'the science is settled'. How utterly convenient to have these two contradictory memes in use - to support the same agenda!!! Conveniently, the scientists who are supposedly muzzled, are never the ones who challenge the 'it's all settled' meme - - - those scientists are immediately shamed, denigrated, and branded as "deniers" - that other gem of a meme beloved by the purveyors of Green Fascism.
If anyone, it is the the media (playing offense as usual for their leftist political agenda) which continues to protect their favourite politicians (and therefore their socialist policies) from scrutiny.
It is the media itself, which is muzzling real science by propagating the phony Green Fear agenda, and demonizing anyone who dares challenge this socialist fabrication.. Think about it, They themselves are the muzzlers of science... they self-muzzle scrutiny of the GreenFear lie, while themselves muzzling those who actually challenge the AGW premise. It's an Orwellian deception enabled here by the media, where the real muzzlers deflect their own complicity in a meme designed to blame others for 'muzzling science'!!!
You see this all the time in the St. Catharines Phony Standard, on the CBC, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Huffington Post etc - the prevalent GreenFear climate change lie is peddled on a daily basis, while its validity - the therefore, validity of political policies which are based on the AGW climate lie - are purposefully not questioned.
I mean, who wants to, believe that Justin Trudeau will be flying to sign phony climate agreements in Paris, fairy-tale 'agreement's based on premises which have no scientific substance?
Stephen Capozzola wrote:
Spiteri reported Phillips' reply: ""Climate Change? Could be" said Phillips "We don't know what it is.""
Pardon?! "Could be" climate change???
"We don't know" ???
Yikes... that's probably not the answer which the GreenFear-mongering St.Catharines Standard was really hoping for!! hahaha
[...see some of my favourite Cagey Climatologist David Phillips stories here; here; here; here !]
Spiteri didn't bother to ask Phillips about the 'toxicity to The Planet' of the heat-trapping water-vapour cloud which Niagara Falls has been constantly releasing for some 12,000 years! [Whaaaaat? Whazzzat 'bout? Whaddaya mean..?]
Why didn't Spiteri or his Standard editors also provide readers with Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's response to Phillips' "we don't know" answer, about climate change??
Did Spiteri even bother to ask Niagara's Greatest GreenFear-monger, Jim 'Kyodiot' Bradley, who, by the way, is Ontario's Environment Minister?! You'd think that Bradley would have a completely opposite point of view than Phillips on the matter!
Jim Bradley and his entire Liberal party believe that the causes of, the existence of, and the political solutions to, the issue of "climate change" HAVE ALL BEEN SETTLED!!! Spiteri surely knows about the Liberals' GreenFear peddling, doesn't he?!
Bradley personally claims that man made climate change/global warming is real, and, obviously, Bradley's been blabbing that way for at least twenty years. Of course, Bradley has never provided any specific scientific basis for his claims, going back to at least 1991. The St.Catharines Standard, meanwhile, has gladly never asked. [see: Liberal MPP Jim Bradley shoots crap]
Bradley most certainly claims to believe that he knows what climate change is - though strangely, a secretive Jim Bradley has never publicly revealed his supporting 'scientific basis' for his climate change beliefs - which he clearly must have already had twenty years ago!
Reporter Ray Spiteri had the opportune time to ask Liberal hack MPP Jim Bradley all about his Liberal global warming AGW "evidence";
to ask all about ClimateGate (one and two);
to ask all about the Mann-made hockey stick climate hoax;
to ask all about the dismantling in Durban of Bradley's GreenFear weapon Kyoto, and why Bradley (McGuinty's supposed environment minister) did nothing about it; and... oh, yeah...
to ask all about Phillips' 'we don't know' answer about climate change!!
Spiteri ASKED NONE OF THAT!!!
Conveniently, the biased wrong-righters at the St.Catharines Standard only brought us half the story, if that. (...an example of what would become more clearly known as "FAKE NEWS" after Trump was elected in 2016)
There are a lot of other GreenFear-mongers in Niagara - why didn't Spiteri talk to any of them, either, so they could, once and for all, prove that Phillips is just 'full of steamy Justin Trudeau sh!t'?
*
Let's move forward to 2016, to yet ANOTHER in a long string of pathetic instances where David Phillips happily pops up in some alarmist climate-change propaganda piece, spouting what amounts to essentially pseudo-scientific baffle-gab.
There was the piece of hagiograhy in the Jan.17, 2016 Toronto Red Star where Amy Dempsey fawningly writes:
"During the Harper era, when scientists were routinely restricted from speaking to the press about their research, reporters could call Phillips and ask him about anything at all. {Nice try at deflection Amy: Your hero Cagey Dave STILL can't prove climate change is caused by humans - even in 2017, under Turdo. Get it?! Enough with your 'scientists were muzzled' Liberal bullshit propaganda! That's also Grant Lafleche's parroted meme! haha. pathetic.}
“Canada’s going to be a warmer country, there’s no question about it,” he said in a January 2014 interview with Peter Mansbridge that aired on national television. {Pardon me, note Amy's deflective slant in not questioning Cagey's statement, that 'there is no question'. It's laughably taken as gospel! It's just that there'd be" NO QUESTION ABOUT IT" from CBC hacks, such as Mansbridge then, or from Amy Dempsey now - you see,
"Canada's Cagey Climatologist" plays to the choir - no challenge is really expected, to whatever he may blurt!
That's the choreographed Cagey Tango - the media don't ask, Cagey doesn't tell. It's all about the insinuation, innuendo, and hyperbole of climate change, without the actual evidence of AGW.
There ARE a lot of questions that Cagey's media sycophants just (conveniently!) can't think of, since they've been programmed by Al Gore and David Suzuki to believe 'it's all settled'.}
"Canada's Cagey Climatologist" plays to the choir - no challenge is really expected, to whatever he may blurt!
That's the choreographed Cagey Tango - the media don't ask, Cagey doesn't tell. It's all about the insinuation, innuendo, and hyperbole of climate change, without the actual evidence of AGW.
There ARE a lot of questions that Cagey's media sycophants just (conveniently!) can't think of, since they've been programmed by Al Gore and David Suzuki to believe 'it's all settled'.}
How did he get away with talking about climate change, of all things? “I think it’s because I try to stick to the science,” he says. “I stay away from the politics and the policy.”
{Hmm: 'stick to the science' eh? Swell, Dave - so, what specific "science" shows that AGW causes "climate change?? Anyone been asking you about that little detail - proof of AGW from Canada's Top Climatologist?!!
Provide your AGW evidence, or stop with the fake climate-change propaganda.
The Toronto Star happily publishes horse shit like this from the likes of Amy Dempsey, yet, there is no substantiation for the GreenFear innuendo being spread. It remains innuendo, fluffed and puffed by the idolizing press. Amy Dempsey - like hundreds of reporters before her - had a clear chance to ask David Phillips to show his evidence for AGW climate change; but, not surprisingly - like those hundreds of others - she didn't ask. She refused. She chose not to challenge whatever shifty gospel she may have believed that Cagey Dave was preaching, and instead, did the usual Cagey Tango}
{Hmm: 'stick to the science' eh? Swell, Dave - so, what specific "science" shows that AGW causes "climate change?? Anyone been asking you about that little detail - proof of AGW from Canada's Top Climatologist?!!
Provide your AGW evidence, or stop with the fake climate-change propaganda.
The Toronto Star happily publishes horse shit like this from the likes of Amy Dempsey, yet, there is no substantiation for the GreenFear innuendo being spread. It remains innuendo, fluffed and puffed by the idolizing press. Amy Dempsey - like hundreds of reporters before her - had a clear chance to ask David Phillips to show his evidence for AGW climate change; but, not surprisingly - like those hundreds of others - she didn't ask. She refused. She chose not to challenge whatever shifty gospel she may have believed that Cagey Dave was preaching, and instead, did the usual Cagey Tango}
“The other thing, too, is I never told Ottawa when I was asked for an interview. Because we were supposed to say when the interview took place, give a list of the questions, and the answers, who was it, how long was it …” Sometimes he gives 12 interviews a day. Logging that information would have eaten up much of his week. So he didn’t do it. “And they never really asked me,” he says. “They never rapped my knuckles.”
{Wow: so Cagey Dave refused to do what his employers asked him to do - gosh, what a hero.
Similarly: Amy Dempsey refused to do what journalists ought to do - ask questions.
Instead, she simply propagandized to her GreenFear-infected TorStar echo chamber.
But let's get back on track to the real issue being whitewashed here: Turdo is now PM - so, where is Amy's story NOW. asking Cagey Dave Phillips for official evidence from Environment Canada, proving AGW?!
Y'see - it was never about proving AGW; it was about dutifully extending and propagandizing the hoax; and it was about sliming Harper. They couldn't prove AGW before Harper; they couldn't prove it during Harper, and they can't prove it after Harper. But, oh, how the innuendo machine cranked out the GreenFear!!
Even though Canada's Cagey Climatologist David Phillips HIMSELF intimates that he was NOT in any way muzzled or reprimanded under Harper, somehow his claim was either misinterpreted or misunderstood by Amy - because his phony muzzlement was a fake lib story from the beginning.
And here we see that Amy just used the phony "scientists are muzzled" meme AGAIN here in this story, really, for no other purpose than to slime Harper, even though Turdo is in power. Even though Cagey sang Amy a different tune, seems like her mind was preoccupied with 'it's all settled' GreenCrap}
{Wow: so Cagey Dave refused to do what his employers asked him to do - gosh, what a hero.
Similarly: Amy Dempsey refused to do what journalists ought to do - ask questions.
Instead, she simply propagandized to her GreenFear-infected TorStar echo chamber.
But let's get back on track to the real issue being whitewashed here: Turdo is now PM - so, where is Amy's story NOW. asking Cagey Dave Phillips for official evidence from Environment Canada, proving AGW?!
Y'see - it was never about proving AGW; it was about dutifully extending and propagandizing the hoax; and it was about sliming Harper. They couldn't prove AGW before Harper; they couldn't prove it during Harper, and they can't prove it after Harper. But, oh, how the innuendo machine cranked out the GreenFear!!
Even though Canada's Cagey Climatologist David Phillips HIMSELF intimates that he was NOT in any way muzzled or reprimanded under Harper, somehow his claim was either misinterpreted or misunderstood by Amy - because his phony muzzlement was a fake lib story from the beginning.
And here we see that Amy just used the phony "scientists are muzzled" meme AGAIN here in this story, really, for no other purpose than to slime Harper, even though Turdo is in power. Even though Cagey sang Amy a different tune, seems like her mind was preoccupied with 'it's all settled' GreenCrap}
Perhaps it’s because he walked the line without stepping over it, stating facts without casting blame or offering his opinion. Or maybe after 48 years and all his achievements, he’s untouchable.
{GreenFear pushers eagerly want Cagey to crow on about climate change. Hundreds of them tried to spin Cagey's facts about weather into innuendo laden GreenFear doomsday stories - - - like Amy does}
{GreenFear pushers eagerly want Cagey to crow on about climate change. Hundreds of them tried to spin Cagey's facts about weather into innuendo laden GreenFear doomsday stories - - - like Amy does}
If Cagey is 'untouchable', it is only because propagandists such as Amy Dempsey allow him to be. Do you understand your own willing role as an enabler here, Amy? Do you get your own role in your own self-fulfilling prophesy?!}
Phillips acknowledges that colleagues may have felt he didn’t use his platform to take a strong enough stand on climate change.
{You were getting close, here Amy - but you chose not cross the line from being a GreenFear propaganda peddler to acting as a journalist}.
And indeed, his friend Phil Chadwick, who speaks admiringly of Phillips, says: “I wish sometimes he would have been a bit more definitive on climate change, but I totally understood what his circumstances were.”
(Maybe Cagey doesn't have the 'definitive' evidence which Chadwick thinks he has! How much more climate change innuendo would Chadwick like Cagey to peddle?
And again, let's ask, since Chadwick (like Amy) seems to have had his ears full of GreenCrap: WHAT exactly did Chadwick 'understand' about Cagey's "circumstances"?
Cagey wasn't muzzled; Cagey makes that clear himself. Yet, that just cannot register in Chadwick's or Amy's GreenFear-packed skulls.
What exactly were these ominous 'circumstances' which Chadwick mentions, other than the already false innuendo of 'muzzlement'?!
Amazing: Amy's story -without questioning - just piles on innuendo BASED ON OTHER INNUENDO!! Sort of like Climate Gate was all about, BTW!
In fact, the case can strongly be made, that Cagey WASN'T ASKED about proving AGW, because it would require him providing evidence (rather than loquacious innuendo) So, he couldn't very well risk having anyone actually pin him down with specific questions on climate change, which would soon show that the "climate change" aspects of any of Cagey's claims were essentially conflated , glorified, weather garbage.
Does Chadwick really think that David Phillips isn't cagey enough to not get caught in a climate change lie? Cagey's moniker ain't fer nothin', you know!!!There is a pretension to uphold here, which would not hold up under scrutiny. Best for the media just to play along with the Cagey Tango, and NOT ask for AGW specifics; beat around the bush all ya want, conflate this with that, throw in some homespun homilies - just DON'T ask Canada's Senior Climatologist for the Chadwickian "definitive" evidence of AGW. The hoax itself must not be challenged.
And Amy skillfully abides - deflect, peddle innuendo, slime Harper, but DO NOT ask the real questions!!
What a heroic effort to add to the FAKE NEWS gallery!
Does Chadwick prefer that Cagey just out and out peddle climate change lies???
Would that satisfy Chadwick - having Cagey become an outright GreenFear-monger?
Cagey's slicker than that: Cagey peddles innuendo!!! Your perception of what Cagey peddles is YOUR problem, make of it what you will. Hey, its hot - is it climate change, or weather... who knows? Hey, it's cold - is it climate change or weather? Who knows?! And Cagey's trademarked folksy caginess just rolls on.}
Phillips strives for balance. The doom-and-gloom perspective of some environmentalists has never sat well with him. “Why would we change if the world’s going to end in 2056?” he says. “I think you’ve gotta give people hope. And so what I try to do is to say you know it’s not necessarily doom and gloom. It’s not the end.”"
Yet unbalanced Liberal GreenFear pushers WANT you to believe that 'it's the end'.
-Another example of classic GreenFear crap appeared in Joseph Brean's Dec. 7, 2016 National Post story:
"...Environment Canada’s senior meteorologist ...{note: some some reason, Phillips was referred to as a 'meterologist' in this NP story, yet in other past publications he was referred to as 'senior climatologist'...} David Phillips said the main effect of this increasingly moist warm air is that when it rains, more falls in less time, as in the kind of deluge Phillips called a "Texas gullywasher"...
Canada is second coldest and first snowiest country in the world, so it is hard to convince Canadians that climate change “has some evil to it,” Phillips said. Many simply look fondly to a future of milder winters and longer summers. A bit of flooding might seem like a small price to pay.
But as he described it, this is not your grandfather’s flood, the classic river backup caused by melt water and ice blockage. It is a modern artifact of a highly urbanized society in an era of warming climate, when a single flooded road can leave people stranded and at risk of death.
“That’s the kind of thing that scares the bejeebies out of insurance people,” he said. “You could have floodier floods and droughtier droughts.””So, there you are:
the Jim "Liberal Gullywasher Of Bullshit" Bradley Scientific School Of Floodier Floods And Droughtier Droughts... Now MORE STEAMIER and MORE CRAPPIER than ever!
There you have it: the National Post reporter Brean DID NOT ask David Phillips to provide actual specific evidence of AGW.
Instead - as many other reporters have similarly done with Cagey Climatologist David Phillips in the past - the National Post simply fear-mongered and spread fake news about climate-change, using David Phillips' silly, homey - but ultimately non-substantive - pontifications as a 'legitimizing' cover.
The Cagey Climatologist Fan Club just loves Phillips.
Let's continue with Cagey's Climate Saga:
In a Sheena Goodyear story written Dec. 7, 2016, the CBC happily, obligingly published an outright lie with their deceptive, GreenFear-laden headline "The weather outside is frightful thanks to climate change and the polar vortex", (scary eh?! - apparently, Canada never had cold and snow before...umm... climate change...)
The CBC, naturally, had to run to the Cagey Climatologist for a bit'o'GreenFear-mongering:
"... "Instead of a bungee cord, it looks like more of a roller-coaster. It dips and dives. It kind of goes up over British Columbia and then dives down across the Prairies down to the United States and then comes swooping up towards eastern Canada," he says.
Sometimes, it brings warm air from the United States, giving Canada the warm November it just had. But then it swoops down and brings cold Arctic air, which is what's happening right now in western Canada.
And the cold tends to linger.
"It's hard to kick the cold air out. It's like molasses — it's thick, it's heavy, it's dense, it hugs the ground," Phillips said. "So when it becomes entrenched, well, you get that pattern set up and it just doesn't move, you see. You get day after day and week after week and then, my God, month after month with the same kind of flow."
The polar vortex
So how does climate change come into all of this?
Arctic and Antarctic sea ice have reached record lows, declining by an area twice the size of Alaska, according to recent measurements.
"We're seeing the Arctic ice cap is melting. We're seeing more open water. The ice is thinner and so there's more heat getting up from the water into the air in the Arctic," Phillips says..
This causes the polar vortex — a swirling area of low-pressure cold air over the North Pole — to weaken.
"Therefore, it leaves home. It migrates," Phillips says. "It's sort of like Canadians going to Florida for the winter. The polar vortex comes south, and it hangs out down in the South and, of course, it brings its cold wind with it."
The bright side?
The good news is the wobbly jet stream means there will most likely be periods of respite this winter. What's more, meteorologists predict this La Nina will be a weak one.
"We don't think it's going to be, as they say, a punishing winter, in spite of what the west are seeing right now," Phillips says.
"I'm not saying it's going to be the Goldilocks of winters but ... if you can remember the toughest winter you ever lived through and then remember last year, it might be something between those two."."
Yep: 'My God, it might be this, might be that, it's a roller coaster, it dips, it dives, it's like molassess'..., blah bla bla...
Phillips' blathering completely evades the issue that 'climate change' is being used here as political propaganda. Phillips never says (but more pointedly, he is NEVER ASKED by hack CBC reporter Sheena Easton to prove) that the 'climate change' they are referring to, is caused by man (AGW).
After all, isn't that what it's all about?? What a bait-and-switch dance of conflation going on here!
The Toronto Star prints a false headline ominously blaming "climate change" - - - for causing winter weather!
Yet no one asks Ole Cagey Dave to prove that "climate change" caused by man, caused winter.... get it? Get the ridiculousness of their scam now?
After all, isn't that what it's all about?? What a bait-and-switch dance of conflation going on here!
The Toronto Star prints a false headline ominously blaming "climate change" - - - for causing winter weather!
Yet no one asks Ole Cagey Dave to prove that "climate change" caused by man, caused winter.... get it? Get the ridiculousness of their scam now?
Isn't it the spectre of AGW {which is the GreenFear movement's underlying tenet; their touchstone, their foundation; their supporting pillar, their all-pervading, 'all-settled' undercurrent} which the CBC and others are hoping that the Cagey Climatologist will confirm through loquacious innuendo (...yet without actually saying so, nor providing proof) that 'climate change' is ALL MAN-MADE, and, that it can only be mitigated by lots of new taxes being instituted and spent by 'well-meaning' Liberals??
Phillips seems more than happy to oblige as a cover for GreenFear-pushers, who act as if for millions of years, some kind of fictitious climate stasis had always been the norm, and that 'climate change' (...which, of course, we have been all indoctrinated 'nudge-nudge-wink-wink' to believe was caused by Harris, Harper, Bush, now Trump, and those denying deniers...) is somehow the new kid on the block (!!)... and furthermore, that 'climate-change' can not only be stopped, but even be REVERSED (wahoooo!!) simply by voting for creeps such as Justin Trudeau, Elizabeth May, Jim Bradley, and Kathleen Wynne!!
It's Phillips and his interviewers who seem to 'dip' and dive' for the cause, peddling their pattern of entrenched views, trying their best to soft-peddle Jim Bradley's Liberal Green Fear delusions.
CBC's slick propaganda peddled here is in the hazy 'nudge-nudge-wink-wink-y'know-what-we mean-and-who-is-to-blame' assumptions being made, and the definitions remaining fuzzy and unspecified. it's just great all-purpose, typical climatalarmist propaganda - no other way to describe it, is there?
Sadly, Canada's Cagey Climatologist, by abiding in this effort, has shown which way his wind blows.
On the CBC nightly news (Dec.23, 2016) there was a sacred confirmation of how far global warming and climate change has been shoved up CBC 'reporter's' asses, and how they dutifully shovel their GreenFear onto their loving, appreciative, sheep-like audience. Wendy Mesley and that creepy CBC 'science' guy Bob McDonald were in a smug lather about Trump referring to THEIR beloved climate change religion as a hoax. You could see the seething hate/shock/disdain in their eyes; their non-comprehension of how anyone could challenge their GreenFear gospel. It was revelatory, it was a teachable moment, it was precious and above all, it was sad. It wasn't news that these two CBC clowns were reporting, it was Green bolshevik agit-prop.
And no; they did not bother to ask Cagey the Canadian Climate King about why Environment Canada hasn't proven the very "climate change" which they themselves were just sneering at Trump about.
Is somebody at CBC "muzzling" Mesley or McDonald, to stop them from obtaining all the "climate change" proof they could ever want, from Canada's Chief Climatologist, David Phillips???
(hahahah.... as if Wendy and Bob were really ever going to go to Cagey to PROVE CLIMATE CHANGE once and for all... hahahah)
Or, is someone "muzzling" Ole Cagey, stopping him from revealing the actual evidence of climate change, once and for all??!!
Funny how these GreenFear pushers continually spout their climate fear agenda, yet somehow can't get/won't provide the actual evidence, which supposedly exists right under their noses at the un-muzzled Environment Canada!!
All the CBC reporters had to do was ASK CAGEY to show them the climate change proof - - but that is NOT the point is it? The point is to keep the GreenFear charade afloat, not to really prove it; the point is to spread endless innuendo and confuse and conflate cherry picked weather with meaningless climate projections, with hints that "progressive" saviours such as Liberal charlatans Jim Bradley or Justin Trudeau can PREVENT the climate from changing, if only they could have an endless supply of taxes.
To closed-minded CBC clowns, their GreenFear-based religion is 'all-settled' and cannot be questioned. It was a typical drive-by anti-Trump smear, but, apparently it's mandatory for the CBC to keep flailing Liberal climate change deceptions.
But let's get back to Cagey's bountiful loquaciousness, which has no bounds (!) - here's yet another piece, this time by CTV's Taline McPhedran, Dec.11, 2016) :
"According to Dave Phillips, a senior climatologist with Environment Canada, the weather system moved from the northwestern part of the United States and over to the Great Lakes, heading northeast. A majority of areas in southern Ontario are expected to get anywhere from 10 to 15 centimetres of snow by Monday morning.“That’s more than we had all of last year and this is only the first big one,” Phillips told CTV News Channel on Sunday.."
WHAT UTTER CRAP FROM CANADA'S CAGEY CLIMATOLOGIST DAVID PHILLIPS!!
OMG: Canada's SENIOR CLIMATOLOGIST is warning us this is only the first big one ---- that means, there will be more Big Ones ---- OOOOOMG---- what to do? --- what to do?!? --- can we get Trudeau and Jim Bradley to prevent all this??? We MUST STOP THE CLIMATE FROM CHANGING - NOW!!! We don't want any Big Ones anymore!! We want nothing to change!!
There was not much snow at all in St. Catharines during Dec. 11 - Dec 12, 2016!! A little bit of snow fell overnight - WAY LESS than what fell during "ALL OF LAST YEAR", as David Phillips fear-mongered about, and got completely wrong.
He easily, glibly and WILLINGLY fear-mongered - simply on speculation.
Canada's Cagey Climatologist CANNOT GET THE WEATHER right, a DAY in advance; yet, this is the same darling go-to guy when the media needs a booster-dose of Climate Change GreenFear.
But... oh, yes... Slick Cagey always has an out {...hence, the nick name!} He did say "a majority of areas are expected to get anywhere from 10 15 cm..." so, there ya go: ya can't pin Ole Cagey down! Ya can't make the crap stick to Cagey, there's always some indecipherable home-spun connotation, some weasel word, an asterisk, an 'expectation', a qualifier, a generalization, a 'potentially' this, a' likely' that, a 'possibility' here, a 'probability' there...
After all, in Cagey's world, some snow was bound to fall somewhere, right!? Point is: was this man-made climate change at work??? The CTV reporter NEVER ASKED.
Was there some unspoken rule that, in literally hundreds of interviews over the years, prevented anyone from asking Canada's Senior Climatologist David Phillips to provide evidence of 'climate change' caused by man? Why isn't anyone actually asking Cagey Dave about that?! Why isn't ANYONE asking David Phillips if the 'climate' can be prevented from 'changing', and if so, how?! What is it with this phony dance, this Cagey Two-Step, which the media continually performs with David Phillips?
Gosh: if we gave ALL of our treasury's dollars to Justin Trudeau and to Kathleen Wynne to Save The Planet, will that Stop And Reverse Climate Change???????! Will we finally get rid of this horrible changing climate once and for all, and just go back to a good ole static climate, where nothing ever changed, like we once had for millions of years when everything was good, when there was no climate change... heh heh... to scare us - - - until that Harris came along and ruined it all? Seriously... this is what Liberal MPP Jim Bradley - Ontario's Godfather Of GreenFear - wanted us to believe...
Politics and weather are conflated for political purposes.
The cumulative work is in conflating weather with GreenFear, using elements of the former to 'hint at' (but not prove) the latter.
Another instance: Dec.21, 2016 CTV News presenter (reporter??) Erin Paul had the apparently-mandatory-because-it's-the-start-of-winter TV interview ("The real deal is coming".... ohh... ohhhh... are you afraid yet of the ominous GreenFear being peddled??!) with the "expert" Senior Climatologist David Phillips, and there was a lot of the typical homey banter.
Yet, CTV reporter Erin Paul did NOT ask the "expert":
'David, is this climate change? Is this all caused by anthropogenic, man-made global warming? Do you have any evidence that this is man-made 'climate-change'?
I'm asking you this specifically, because also today - Dec. 21, 2016, the same day that we are interviewing you - CTV reported Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau saying that 'climate change is a fact'.
David, what 'climate change fact' is the Prime Minister referring to here?
Do you - as Canada's Senior Climatologist - have any evidence of the 'climate change fact' which Justin Trudeau is talking about? Don't the pipelines, which Trudeau was approving today- while telling us that 'climate change is a fact' - carry oil which supposedly causes climate change??!
David can you please expand on these specific definitions, and reconcile these assumptions, which have become political memes without scientific bearing?'
yah: CTV never bothered to ask about the conflicting 'news' appearing on the same day, on their own site!
They had a chance to question Phillips, yet, they demurred, and shied away from the issue of climate change.
THAT kind of conversation WILL NEVER HAPPEN on Canadian media.
Remember the Liberal meme about 'Canada's scientists being muzzled'?! Yet: when exactly had David Phillips ever been "muzzled"???? Has anyone ever asked Phillips about THAT meme??!
Has Justin Trudeau ever directed Canada's esteemed - and unmuzzled! - Environment Canada to provide evidence of the 'fact' of 'man-made climate change', so that his Liberals can justify valiantly "battling climate change" by spending ever-more taxes?!
Wouldn't Cagey be more than happy to provide Justin Trudeau with this proof, with this "fact' - as Trudeau claims - of man-made climate change?!
Seems like Trudeau won't ask, because Phillips can't prove it.
Has Justin Trudeau ever directed Canada's esteemed - and unmuzzled! - Environment Canada to provide evidence of the 'fact' of 'man-made climate change', so that his Liberals can justify valiantly "battling climate change" by spending ever-more taxes?!
Wouldn't Cagey be more than happy to provide Justin Trudeau with this proof, with this "fact' - as Trudeau claims - of man-made climate change?!
Seems like Trudeau won't ask, because Phillips can't prove it.
Why doesn't the CTV news organization NOW ask Canada's Senior Un-muzzled Climatologist David Philips for his official stance on man-made climate change??!
What is stopping CTV from asking David Phillips (now that he has ....ummm....apparently been un-muzzled by Liberal Saviours such as Justin Trudeau) to provide official confirmation of AGW?
So: who's "muzzling" David Phillips today? The left's 'evil' bogeyman Harper can't be blamed.
This CTV reporter Erin Paul (as did many other reporters before her) HAD THE CHANCE to ACTUALLY ask David Phillips some real questions, but all we got was softball 'nudge-nudge-wink-wink' FLAKY FLUFF.
-
Speaking about flaky fluff, here we go with yet another TYPICAL example of yet ANOTHER vacuous interview with Canada's Cagey Climatologist, David Phillips (...the dance never ends with this guy: the media's at him essentially everyday...) This time it was reporter Bill Graveland who joined the long list of partners sent in to dance with Cagey Dave (Globe and Mail (Jan.13, 2017):
"It’s not as if winter is over by a long shot,” Phillips said. “We’ve just hit the halfway point, but the good news is ... the flow seems to be coming more from the Pacific than the Arctic.”
Although there are no records being set in Western Canada, Phillips said it has been a tough year for the four western provinces. Vancouver has received twice as much snow as normal and recorded 30 days where temperatures were below normal — double the average of 15. “It has been persistently cold for that period,” said Phillips. “In fact, if you look at the average temperature in December, the last time there was a colder December was 1990. That was more than 25 years ago. It was a bit of a shocker.”
Winnipeg received a record snowfall for the month of December, while Calgary has suffered freezing temperatures and heavy snow. This winter in Western Canada follows one of the warmest years on record in 2015 and, in many jurisdictions, winter was essentially cancelled last year, he said.
Canadians tend to base their weather expectations on the winter before, so this season has come as a shock to many, Phillips said.
“It’s like a punch in the face. Clearly, when you look at the temperatures, certainly the amount of snow, the number of cold days — if you’re whining, it’s not without cause. It has been tough.”
Reporter Graveland never once asked David Phillips whether the 'persistent cold' was caused by man-made global warming / climate change (...as experienced climatologists like Jane Fonda might have us believe). Graveland didn't ask exactly WHY it was a "shocker" that the month of Dec. 2016 was the coldest December since Dec. 1990. Was this cold directly attributable to AGW climate change???? Or was it the previous warmth?
And, who would be 'shocked' - and why? What kind of expectations had been fed to those who suddenly, somehow, were 'punched in the face' and became 'shocked'? Were these people 'shocked' because they experienced a paradigm-shift after having been conditioned (ie punched in the face?!) by years of leftist GreenFear-mongering?
And, who would be 'shocked' - and why? What kind of expectations had been fed to those who suddenly, somehow, were 'punched in the face' and became 'shocked'? Were these people 'shocked' because they experienced a paradigm-shift after having been conditioned (ie punched in the face?!) by years of leftist GreenFear-mongering?
Phillips was not asked, after he said "winter was essentially cancelled last year" (...exactly where, which exact jurisdictions? Is he referring to the Prairies in 2016..?) if that 'cancellation of winter' he just mentioned, was direct evidence of climate change! The opening WAS RIGHT THERE for Graveland to ask for clarification!!! Winter was cancelled, Cagey said; sounds like global warming, then, doesn't it?!
Yet, there was NO follow up from this Globe and Mail reporter.
Cagey's comments were just left there, unquestioned, to hang and ferment in the reader's mind...
... Winter was cancelled... Winter was cancelled... Winter was cancelled... repeat... Winter was cancelled... Winter was cancelled... it must be Global Warming, you see; it's gotta be Climate Change, you see... Winter was cancelled... Do not ask why... Winter was cancelled. . .
All that reporter Graveland had to do (as a journalist in a supposedly open and free society) was follow up on Cagey's statements: "David, you just stated that winter was essentially cancelled in the Canadian West in 2016, correct? Was that directly attributable to Global Warming, caused by man?"
Cagey's comments were just left there, unquestioned, to hang and ferment in the reader's mind...
... Winter was cancelled... Winter was cancelled... Winter was cancelled... repeat... Winter was cancelled... Winter was cancelled... it must be Global Warming, you see; it's gotta be Climate Change, you see... Winter was cancelled... Do not ask why... Winter was cancelled. . .
All that reporter Graveland had to do (as a journalist in a supposedly open and free society) was follow up on Cagey's statements: "David, you just stated that winter was essentially cancelled in the Canadian West in 2016, correct? Was that directly attributable to Global Warming, caused by man?"
But, well, well... Lookit that: Graveland doesn't ask and David Phillips doesn't answer!!!
THAT'S how the game is played!!
Well done, gentlemen!
Nice performance!
Great dance moves!
Good show!
Well done, gentlemen!
Nice performance!
Great dance moves!
Good show!
The Globe and Mail had the chance to pin down Canada's Senior Climatologist and get down to the facts and get the evidence of all that man made global warming / climate change which Jim Bradley, Justin Trudeau, Kathleen Wynne... and Jane Fonda... say is happening.
But facts would cloud and hinder the continual propagation of GreenFear innuendo; therefore, we have this ongoing, drawn-out Cagey Tango, where the two dancers coyly carry out their choreographed moves, winking at each other knowingly, dropping an opening hint here, a seductive spin there, suggesting the kinds of things both know must better be left unsaid... ... sheesh...
Was reporter Graveland self-muzzled, or was he muzzled by his Globe and Mail bosses NOT to ask Environment Canada's Senior Climatologist for evidence to support that what Phillips reports is directly attributable to climate change? That IS the underlying message here, isn't it? Alleging 'climate change', without proving it? Scaring the shit out of people with doomsday GreenFear innuendo so that leftists can raise taxes?
Why the massive disconnect between the media blaring everyday about 'climate change' - - and yet, not actually asking for the corroborating evidence about climate change from Canada's SENIOR climatologist?
It should be easy for Phillips to prove, seeing as that even Al Gore and David Suzuki and Leonardo DiCaprio and Jerry Brown and Stephane Dion. . . they ALL 'know' that global warming is caused by man!
So why can't Canada's Senior Climatologist actually come out and admit that everything he reports, is and always was, caused by man-made climate change?!
He's not muzzled anymore, under Turdo is he? (...as the Canadian lefties loved to allege when Harper was in power, when they were spreading the meme that "Canada's scientists are being muzzled") Which scientists were muzzled? Was it David Phillips? Or is Philips not a "scientist", just a glorified weatherman??!! Why is this guy ALWAYS being quoted, and yet, after the interview, we are left with the realization that he had nothing to say. How can this occur over literally thousands of media interviews over the years - and never a request - nor an answer - about proving climate change?! Its FLICKING unreal.
Cagey Dave could just come right out and now admit that EVERY interview he has given since he started his career, was actually a demonstration of climate change evidence, right from the start, from Day One.
He could say "Over the thousands of interviews I've given over the years, I can now admit that I have been actually reporting on man-made climate-change all this time, since the beginning of my career, because man causes the climate which creates the weather. Or maybe it's the other way around? Anyway, as Hillary says, what it does it matter now, anyway: man definitely has always had something to do with it, way before I came along. Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger; blame man. Man is to blame for the weather which causes the climate to change which then changes the weather, you see? This has always been so, since the dawn of man."
That would make clowns such as Al Gore and Catherine McKenna and Jim Bradley real happy. So, why isn't David Phillips letting loose and telling us the truth? What's he hiding about climate change??!
Why hasn't anyone actually asked Canada's Senior Climatologist about... umm... "CLIMATE CHANGE"??
The Sad Saga of Canada's Cagey Climatologist continues:
Fast forward to another CBC GreenFear piece (Jan.31, 2017) this time written by Lauren Pelley, where the dark insinuation is that somehow climate change caused the month of January to be cloudy, sunless, and , well... dark. Lauren Pelley again does the Cagey Two Step with David Phillips, never once asking Cagey "Is all this evidence of man made climate change, Dave? Will the carbon taxes legislated by Sunny Ways Turdo eliminate these dark days forever, Dave? Should we all vote for the Liberals, Dave, to Save The Planet From Peril??"
Another sad demo of Fake News on the GreenFear-peddling climate front, in a long line of similar Cagey Dave propaganda.
C'mon, somebody: just ask Ole David Phillips, if he has any evidence whatsoever of man made climate change!
NO ONE is preventing Canada's Senior Cagey Climatologist from answering.
No one is muzzling David Phillips! (Eh, Grant Lafleche?)
It's apparent that NO ONE IS ASKING!
The reporters are muzzling themselves, dancing around the climate change AGW issue with Ole Cagey, but never directly addressing it. GreenFear permeates their phony reports, the main purpose of which is to propagandize FOR GreenFear-policies, without actually demonstrating that the weather event factoids Dave talks about, are actually caused by man.
All these "reports"over the years with David Philips amount to an impressive oeuvre of unsubstantiated GreenFear propaganda. It's a homey pastiche of cagily subtle hints, causal conflation, insidious double-meanings, allusions, dire innuendo, oblique comparisons.
Why aren't hacks such as Lauren Pelley (...in a long line of sad stenographers posing as' journalists'...) asking the question?
The Canadian and the Ontario governments peddle claims about climate change that Canada's Senior Climatologist Phillips (to his discredit) cagily refuses to address (...although, of course, he freely could), and furthermore, his enabler-"interviewers" (to their discredit) never dare ask (...although, of course, they freely could).
Therefore we have this ongoing delicate Cagey Tango, this phony show where two willing, nudge-nudge-wink-wink partners choreograph their coy dance to propagate the GreenFear pretense without challenging the underlying premise. They have both willingly peddled what amounts to a long-arc of innuendo posing as 'it's all settled climate science'.
In other words, it's designed to be fake.
It's designed to be 'politics-disguised-as-science' propaganda - a cagey conspiracy that is inherently apparent throughout hundreds upon hundreds of interviews: how can the question of "man made climate change" not ever be raised?
It's as if the press spins what Cagey says as being 'evidence of climate change', when Cagey was only talking about common weather - - - a disconnect of cross-purposes, with the press seeing only what they wanted to see.
It's like David Phillips is Canada's Chauncey Gardener of weather, where Cagey Dave has been elevated to some kind of climate change deity, where everything he says is taken at face-value as wise gospel explaining man made climate change.
And yet, you'd think that David Phillips would have recognized this scenario a long time ago, after perhaps being misunderstood after several interviews, and then setting the record straight by openly saying yes, this IS evidence of AGW, or, no, this ISN'T evidence of AGW.
But Cagey Dave didn't challenge his interviewer's reports. They came to him, begging for wisdom and climate guidance. Cagey became a light in their proverbial darkness. They heard what Cagey uttered, and determined that it was wisdom. It reaffirmed their own beliefs, spoke to their innate suspicions - how could it not mirror their own default bias?! Like Chauncey Gardener, Dave let the charade continue for years; unlike Chauncey, though, Cagey Dave had a chance - many chances - to set the record straight.
The Sad Saga of Canada's Cagey Climatologist will continue.
Let's ask:
Why hasn't anyone in Canada asked Canada's Senior Cagey Climatologist to comment on the fake basis of the Paris climate agreements?!
Again, you'd think that all those Canadian GreenFear-pushing media outlets which amplify the climate change lie on a daily basis, would have asked David Phillips, or flakey Liberals such as Justin Trudeau, Catherine McKenna, Jim Bradley, Stephane Dion, or Kathleen Wynne, or daffy David Suzuki, for their detailed responses - detailed responses. you know, not the politicized GreenGarbage rhetoric that is their usual hallmark.
As Stephen Capozzola asks (PoliZette, Feb.14, 2017) in "Warming cheating: Once experts aren't bound by politics, the truth about climate change surface":
"...One has to wonder why, if the case for man-made warming is so tenuous, would alarmists resort to such questionable methods? Wouldn't the more obvious recourse be to question the hypothesis itself? But such is the state of the contemporary global warming debate. Hundreds of advocacy groups are engaged in an all-out campaign to certify the premise of anthropogenic warming..."
That sums up the bullshit which has been spewed by the skewed left, deluded and besotted with creating a scenario of fear to push their socialist agenda. Canada's prime minister Zollander Turdo has happily pushed the phony climate change agenda - yet, we are to believe that somehow scientists were umm,,, 'muzzled'... by some one, to prevent them from revealing their unfounded 'truth' about supposed man made climate change!!! It's bizarre.
The thing is, no one has asked Liberal climate liars Jim Bradley or Stephane Dion or Justin Trudeau, for their detailed evidence on supposed man made climate change, details on the underlying AGW premise which they use on a daily basis further their socialist agendas. These unsubstantiated claims you often hear in the media that 'science is muzzled' are themselves regurgitations of a phony meme, still constantly repeated in Green Bolshevik echo chambers; y'know, 'Harper muzzled scientists'; 'Trump muzzles science' etc.
Yet, when was 'science' exactly muzzled??? No one has ever asked the politicians who ought to know - such as Canada's and Ontario's Liberal, for example!!
There again is the falsity of the Green Lie; Liberals in power in Canada - such as Jim Bradley - get away with peddling climate bullshit without ever being held to account by a complicit media!
The media set the tone to ease in the Green Fear agenda years ago. The media has acted as the protectors for the policies for which there is no scientific basis, They spread the meme that 'science is being muzzled' - YET, they also spread the meme that 'the science is settled'. How utterly convenient to have these two contradictory memes in use - to support the same agenda!!! Conveniently, the scientists who are supposedly muzzled, are never the ones who challenge the 'it's all settled' meme - - - those scientists are immediately shamed, denigrated, and branded as "deniers" - that other gem of a meme beloved by the purveyors of Green Fascism.
If anyone, it is the the media (playing offense as usual for their leftist political agenda) which continues to protect their favourite politicians (and therefore their socialist policies) from scrutiny.
It is the media itself, which is muzzling real science by propagating the phony Green Fear agenda, and demonizing anyone who dares challenge this socialist fabrication.. Think about it, They themselves are the muzzlers of science... they self-muzzle scrutiny of the GreenFear lie, while themselves muzzling those who actually challenge the AGW premise. It's an Orwellian deception enabled here by the media, where the real muzzlers deflect their own complicity in a meme designed to blame others for 'muzzling science'!!!
You see this all the time in the St. Catharines Phony Standard, on the CBC, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Huffington Post etc - the prevalent GreenFear climate change lie is peddled on a daily basis, while its validity - the therefore, validity of political policies which are based on the AGW climate lie - are purposefully not questioned.
I mean, who wants to, believe that Justin Trudeau will be flying to sign phony climate agreements in Paris, fairy-tale 'agreement's based on premises which have no scientific substance?
Stephen Capozzola wrote:
"For those who follow the heated squabbling of climate alarmists and skeptics, this has been a bombshell week. John Bates, a recently retired scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has revealed that a 2015 study by the government agency was riddled with bias and questionable methodology.
More specifically, NOAA released a study in 2015 announcing that we haven’t had a “pause” in global warming over the past 15 years. Although the study flatly contradicted data from satellites and weather balloons documenting a net flatlining of temperatures, its findings were cited prominently at the 2015 Paris climate talks. The resulting Paris accord called for major decarbonization efforts worldwide.
According to Bates, the “pausebuster” study, led by former NOAA Director Thomas Karl, was rushed to publication before underlying data issues were resolved. Bates says that Karl was “insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximized warming and minimized documentation.”
It’s interesting that the Obama administration rushed to embrace the Karl study, though, since a subsequent paper in Nature Magazine disagreed with the NOAA report, saying the observed “slowdown” in warming is real, and occurred at a time when carbon dioxide emissions have been rising steadily.
Even the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has stated that “the rate of warming over the past 15 years … is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951.”
Subsequent rumblings about possible bias at NOAA prompted Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) to investigate the matter in 2016, earning the veteran congressman considerable criticism. In taking on NOAA, Smith was accused of being "anti-science" and trying to "intimidate" the scientific community. The U.K.'s Guardian even referred to him as a "witch hunter."
Now, however, it looks like Smith was absolutely right to question whether taxpayer money was used in a dubious manner.
It's significant that satellite and weather balloon readings of global temperatures have steadily borne out observations that net temperatures have remained relatively stable since the start of the 21st century. However, NOAA said that its 2015 study used "significant improvements in the calculation of trends" to assemble "improved versions of both sea surface temperature and land surface air temperature datasets."
But NOAA engaged in two very questionable practices in order to arrive at their new and improved graph of temperatures. They included seawater temperature measurements collected from the engine intake valves of ocean-going vessels, and they estimated Arctic Ocean temperatures by extrapolating from nearby land areas.
The result? When compared to satellite and weather balloon data, their "new" findings eliminated the net flatlining of 21st century global temperatures and instead showed a series of scraggly rising temperature lines.
Essentially, NOAA wanted the American people to believe that eliminating satellite data, while including readings from engine thermometers, would yield a more accurate temperature record. For the casual observer, all of this might seem plausible. But clearly NOAA engaged in a questionable methodology.
Most notably, thermometers installed in the intake valves of ocean-going vessels aren't intended for such precise measurements of temperature. This becomes all the more apparent when one considers, for example, that 2016 was declared the "hottest year on record" by a mere 0.01 degrees Celsius.
But there's also the possibility of "heat contamination" from the ships themselves. Seawater intake valves also pose a big problem, as well. They vary in depth according to the size and shape of a vessel's hull — presenting a problem for collecting samples of uniform depth.
Interestingly, NOAA gave priority to these ship readings. As one of the report's authors explained, "[D]ata collected from buoys are cooler than ship-based data. In order to accurately compare ship measurements and buoy measurements over the long-term, they need to be compatible. Scientists have developed a method to correct the difference between ship and buoy measurements, and we are using this in our trend analysis."
How exactly did NOAA adjust for this discrepancy? They added 0.12 degrees Celsius (0.25°F) to each buoy to bring their measurements in line with readings taken from ship gauges.
It's somewhat amusing to look at NOAA's website, though, and see their justification for using engine intake readings. Essentially, they portray such measurements as a step forward in scientific progress, thanks to the "change from ships throwing a bucket over the side, bringing some ocean water on deck, and putting a thermometer in it, to reading the thermometer in the engine coolant water intake."
But NOAA took another liberty, as well. They decided to estimate Arctic Ocean temperatures based on neighboring land areas. Simply put, there are only a limited number of temperature monitoring stations in the Arctic.
As such, NOAA simply extrapolated Arctic Ocean temperatures from neighboring land-based measurements. However, much of the Arctic Ocean can remain ice-covered throughout the summer, and imposing warmer land surface data on areas of sea ice will inevitably skew temperature readings.
But this is what NOAA undertook in order to make the case for concerted worldwide action against fossil fuel use. And while many climate-watchers had suspicions about the validity of NOAA's approach, it took Bates' revelations to help confirm the bias that drove their findings.
One has to wonder why, if the case for man-made warming is so tenuous, would alarmists resort to such questionable methods? Wouldn't the more obvious recourse be to question the hypothesis itself? But such is the state of the contemporary global warming debate. Hundreds of advocacy groups are engaged in an all-out campaign to certify the premise of anthropogenic warming.
And with salaries, grants, and reputations on the line, it's doubtful that truth and scientific accuracy will get in the way of their ultimate quest. The American people deserve better, though, noting the large sacrifices that will be asked of them if the United States continues to follow the edicts of the Paris accord." Steven Capozzola has served as media director for both the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) and the U.S. Business & Industry Council (USBIC).
Will any media outlet ask Justin Trudeau or Jim Bradley or Chris Bittle about any of this? These Liberal clowns propagate the climate-change lie every day which they are in office.
And, far be it for any reporter in Canada to ask Canada's Senior Cagey Climatologist Davis Phillips for his comments on the phony basis of the Paris climate accords and Canada's labyrinth of cap and trade schemes - what's that got to do with climate change - right"?!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
