Climate during the modern Holocene.
Click for larger image.


Welcome Alternative View Skeptic Site


by Lewis Loflin


Based on proxy data, the graph above illustrates that the early Holocene—our current epoch—was significantly warmer than contemporary claims suggest. During this period, temperatures may have been 2.5°C to 7°C higher than today, allowing birch trees to thrive near the Arctic Circle in Russia. This evidence challenges certain activist narratives, but my focus remains on science and reason, not emotions.

See extract Holocene Tree History.

Welcome to my website, where I tackle topics others avoid. I prioritize the scientific method and empirical data over political correctness, rejecting reliance on "authority" or unverified computer models. For decades, I've encountered predictions of imminent climate catastrophe and apocalyptic scenarios—none have materialized, nor will they soon.

Predicting future climate events with computer models has proven unreliable, and we must demand more precise, methodically proven science. We could phase out most fossil fuel use today without causing widespread poverty or starvation. So, what's holding us back? The issue isn't "renewables," which often inflict more significant environmental harm than they mitigate.


"There is nothing renewable about the billions of tons of non-renewable minerals and metals that are needed for wind and solar." -- Patrick Moore


The term "climate denier" is a slur and unwelcome here. Questioning the repeated failed predictions and the damaging political and economic policies pushed by activists isn't denial—it's reason. Climate naturally changes, and even with human influence, nature can adapt if we protect it sensibly.

Unlike the climate-industrial complex or Stephen Schneider, I rely solely on the scientific method, drawing from my lifelong science study through textbooks and courses.

I'm no expert and claim no unique insights, but the evidence is accessible to anyone who seeks it.

Solutions lie in existing technology and objective reasoning. There's nothing inherently wrong with humans shaping nature.

Quoting Marian L. Tupy:

There is no reason for pessimism about the future of our species or the planet. ... Put differently, nature adjusts to human activity in a multitude of ways and, the greater the human impact, the greater the natural adjustment. So, instead of seeing natural collapse, humans are encountering nature's resilience.

A politician in a video absurdly links meat consumption to misogyny, racism, and colonialism, labeling it a "whiteness" issue that perpetuates gender oppression.

Such claims suggest climate dogma serves as a veil for attacking Western culture. Natural climate variations, which have always caused global challenges, are now wrongly pinned on Western meat-eating or electricity use.

Further quotes from this individual include: "Eating meat is racist & an expression of white supremacy," "Our whiteness is part of the problem with meat eating," and "Meat eating is also one of the ways gender-based oppression is perpetuated."

Issues in developing nations stem from complex factors, not racism or colonialism. This delusional narrative benefits no one.


Geenland

Recent research by the Niels Bohr Institute (Dahl-Jensen 2013) was the first to target ice accumulated in Greenland during the previous interglacial period, known as the Eemian. The results revealed that the Eemian interglacial warm period, between 130,000 and 115,000 years ago, was much warmer than previously thought. In fact, it was, 8°C (14.4°F) warmer than today. The implications are enormous. Even though the temperatures during the Eemian were 2.5°C (4.5°F) higher than even the most aggressive IPCC predictions, the Greenland ice sheet lost only a quarter of its mass. While 25% is significant, it is far less than the predictions of total ice elimination in response to far less warming. Also, polar bears evolved about 150,000 years ago and survived the Eemian warm period even though there was seldom any polar ice.

The polar bears survived. Greenland didn't melt.

Source(s): Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Inst, https://www.nbi.ku.dk/english/news/news13/greenland-ice-cores-reveal-warm-climate-of-the-past

Failing minority students Chicago Public Schools.
Failing minority students Chicago Public Schools.
Click for larger image.

Challenges in the Education System: A Balanced Perspective

by Lewis Loflin, with drafting assistance from Grok, an AI created by xAI


What should we make of an education system that views a 40% proficiency rate as a success? This raises questions about academic standards and their alignment with student potential.

While the intent behind such celebrations may stem from efforts to promote inclusivity and address diverse learning needs, some argue that lowering expectations risks undermining literacy and critical thinking skills, which are essential for individual and societal progress.

Two factors contribute to this concern. First, the significant influx of immigrants from lower-performing educational systems into a modern welfare state has posed integration challenges.

Cultural differences and varying educational backgrounds can replicate difficulties seen in their countries of origin, such as limited access to advanced schooling, though this also brings opportunities for cultural enrichment and economic diversity.

The debate centers on how best to support these students without compromising overall standards.

My earlier article, "Who Are the Smartest Countries? Nobel Prizes Tell the Story," analyzed international PISA scores, noting that American white students—broadly defined to include some Middle Eastern and North African groups—often outperform much of Europe and parts of Asia.

However, scores for Black and Hispanic students, as well as those from certain African, Latin American, and Muslim-majority nations, tend to fall lower.

These disparities highlight the need to understand ability and talent variations, which differ across individuals and groups, rather than attributing them solely to systemic factors.

Educational policy also plays a role. Some criticize teachers’ unions and school boards for prioritizing curricula like critical race theory (CRT) and gender identity discussions over core academics, potentially diluting standards to pursue "equity."

The goal of equal outcomes across diverse groups is challenging, given natural differences in aptitude and interest.

Adjusting standards by race or ethnicity, however, can be seen as inconsistent with fairness, a principle I uphold on this site—standards should reflect ability, not identity.

The concept of "systemic racism" is another point of contention. Critics, including myself, argue that evidence for widespread systemic bias in education is weak and that such claims may exaggerate historical issues, fueling division rather than solutions.

Instead, some point to systemic challenges like crime and lawlessness in certain communities, which may stem from socioeconomic factors or policy choices, such as underinvestment in education or enforcement.

I attribute this mainly to family breakdowns driven by other factors such as poverty and substance abuse.

These issues are particularly visible in some Democrat-led cities and at the southern border, where governance and immigration policies are debated.

Republicans, however, share responsibility. Their focus on business interests and profit-driven policies, including support for mass immigration, has sometimes worsened labor conditions.

These policies hit poor Blacks, in particular, the hardest. Due to past injustices and being displaced by mass immigration, their access to upward mobility remains a distant dream.

Democrats, meanwhile, are criticized for shifting focus from economic equity to identity politics, which some see as neglecting traditional labor bases, including Black working-class communities, in favor of broader demographic changes.

Both parties have pursued worker-destructive policies over decades, often prioritizing corporate gains or political agendas over the needs of vulnerable groups.

Our polarized political climate, marked by terms like "denier," "Islamophobia," "transphobia," and "racism," complicates addressing these issues.

While these labels aim to highlight discrimination, their overuse can stifle dialogue. Moving forward, we should focus on evidence-based solutions—improving education through tailored support, addressing crime with community input, and reforming immigration with economic and cultural balance in mind—rather than relying on divisive rhetoric.

CO2 14 million years activist on X.

Climate Change is not a Hoax

by Lewis Loflin


It would be unwise to dismiss the potential impacts of significant climate shifts on human civilization, especially with a global population of 8 billion.

However, dismantling modern industrial society in response is an equally impractical approach that overlooks the issue's complexity.

Major climate shifts are inevitable, driven by factors largely independent of CO2 levels.

Over the past 11,700 years of the Holocene epoch, the Earth has experienced numerous dramatic climate changes, as evidenced by historical records and paleoclimate data. Addressing these shifts through trendy climate or social initiatives may distract from understanding the broader, natural processes at play.

I remain skeptical of computer model predictions and sensationalized media reports on climate change.

Climate is inherently dynamic, shaped by a multitude of natural factors. These include plate tectonics (once called continental drift), cosmic rays, ocean, and wind circulation patterns (such as El Niño, La Niña, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and Atlantic Multidecadal Variability), land and seafloor rise and subsidence, solar radiation, volcanic dust and aerosols, mountain ranges like the Andes and Himalayas, human-induced pollution, greenhouse gases, Saharan dust, ice and glacier cover, Earth's axial tilt, and the positions of planets in the solar system, among others.

This complexity suggests climate change is a natural phenomenon influenced by far more than any single factor, such as CO2 emissions.

I question the reliability of computer models and the alarmist narratives often amplified by activists, politicians, and the media.

Many models have failed to predict climate trends accurately, and their assumptions can reflect biases or oversimplifications of the Earth's systems.

Failed computer modeling and hysterical headlines don't mean climate change itself is a hoax—far from it.

In my view, the real issue lies in how the term "climate change" has been redefined to focus narrowly on human-driven causes, often ignoring the broader natural cycles that have shaped the planet for millennia.

Acknowledging climate change as a natural process doesn't negate the need for responsible environmental stewardship.

We should address human impacts, like pollution and deforestation. However, we must admit that most climate shifts can't be controlled or attributed to human activity.

A balanced approach that respects scientific inquiry avoids sensationalism and considers both natural and human factors, offering a more constructive path forward than denial or drastic societal upheaval.

The image above, shared by Go Green—an environmental activist group—claims that "Atmospheric CO2 levels haven't been this high in 14 million years," a statement echoed in an article titled "Current carbon dioxide levels last seen 14 million years ago" by Issam Ahmed on Phys.org, published on March 1, 2024.

The piece warns that the impacts of these CO2 levels are "not yet manifested in everyday reality, but they will be one day."

While Go Green and similar groups often cite credible science, their messaging can blend objective data with subjective agendas, aiming to alarm the public and push for specific political changes.

The article by Ahmed, however, doesn't present new research. Instead, it synthesizes existing studies, re-evaluating published data on CO2 levels using updated methods.

Ahmed explains that paleoclimatologists used "proxies"—such as the chemical composition of ancient leaves, minerals, and plankton—to estimate atmospheric carbon levels over millions of years.

The study confirms that 50 million years ago, during the Eocene epoch (56 to 33.9 million years ago), CO2 levels spiked as high as 1,600 ppm, temperatures were 12°C warmer than today, and a long decline followed.

This period of the Age of Mammals saw the first primates emerge and life flourish in pole-to-pole forests, a time of remarkable biodiversity.

Some research attributes the CO2 spike to volcanic eruptions in what is now Iran, highlighting a natural driver of climate change.

While this synthesis validates well-established geological knowledge—information in textbooks for decades—it's presented in a way that emphasizes alarm over context.

The narrative focuses heavily on CO2 as the primary driver of climate change, suggesting a direct, 100% cause-and-effect relationship with global temperatures. This oversimplification can mislead the public.

As I've noted, the climate is influenced by many factors beyond CO2, including plate tectonics, solar radiation, ocean circulation patterns (like El Niño and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation), volcanic activity, and more.

For instance, the Eocene's warm climate and high CO2 levels coincided with thriving ecosystems that did not collapse, challenging the idea that elevated CO2 inherently spells disaster.

Go Green's post and Ahmed's article exemplify a broader trend among activists and media outlets: using selective scientific findings to create fear rather than foster understanding.

While CO2 levels today (around 420 ppm in 2024) are indeed the highest in 14 million years, this fact alone doesn't account for the complexity of climate systems or the adaptability of life, as seen in the Eocene.

The intent behind such messaging often appears to be political—scaring the public into supporting drastic measures—rather than encouraging a nuanced discussion about environmental stewardship.

Rising CO2 levels warrant attention, particularly regarding human contributions like fossil fuel use and deforestation, which can exacerbate natural climate variability.

However, focusing solely on CO2 while ignoring other drivers or the Earth's historical resilience risks distorting the bigger picture.

A more balanced approach would involve addressing human impacts responsibly—through innovation and sustainable practices—while recognizing that climate change is a natural process we must adapt to, not a simplistic problem to "solve" through fear-driven policies.

Eocene Epoch ocean currents 55.8 – 33.9 MYA when mammals thrived.
Click for a larger image.


The above image illustrates a key aspect of Earth’s climate during the Eocene epoch (55.8 to 33.9 million years ago) when mammals thrived.

This map, which highlights a Global Equatorial Current and a closed Drake Passage linking Antarctica to South America, contrasts sharply with today’s ocean circulation patterns.

My understanding of this period draws heavily from Earth System History by Dr. Steven M. Stanley, a college-level textbook I rely on.

While newer editions cost around $100 on Amazon, a used copy is a worthwhile investment. The book offers a neutral, scientific perspective on climate change, though its dense content makes it challenging—readers may benefit from prior biology or chemistry coursework to fully grasp it.

Dr. Stanley’s work confirms that CO2 levels during the Eocene exceeded 800 ppm, significantly higher than today’s approximately 420 ppm.

However, this alone wasn’t the primary driver of the warm climate.

The image underscores the role of geology and ocean currents. Unlike today, the Drake Passage was closed, allowing warm waters to flow around the globe, warming the poles.

A large seaway between North and South America facilitated a powerful equatorial current from the Pacific to the Atlantic, distributing heat worldwide.

Additionally, the Himalayas were still forming, and the Andes had not yet risen—changes that would later alter climate dynamics.

This configuration and extensive global forest cover maintained a humid climate through transpiration, releasing substantial water vapor into the atmosphere.

This warm, stable environment supported abundant life. Notably, there’s no evidence of mass extinctions during the Eocene, and the oceans, far from acidic, teeming with marine life.

This fact challenges the notion that high CO2 levels inevitably lead to ecological collapse, suggesting other factors—particularly ocean circulation—played a dominant role.

The end of the Eocene, 33.9 million years ago, marks a turning point. The opening of the Drake Passage, separating Antarctica from South America, established a circumpolar current.

Over millions of years, this current cooled and dried the planet, even with CO2 levels remaining high (800+ ppm).

This number implies that ocean currents and geological changes can significantly impact climate more than CO2 alone.

Today’s open Drake Passage and different current patterns reflect a more extraordinary world, highlighting how natural shifts, rather than human activity, have historically driven significant climate transitions.

This perspective encourages a broader view of climate science, recognizing human influences like fossil fuel emissions while appreciating the complex interplay of natural processes.

Dr. Stanley’s work reminds us that understanding these dynamics requires careful study beyond the headlines to inform balanced environmental strategies.

Date: 3/16/2025.

Acknowledgment: I’d like to thank Grok, an AI by xAI, for helping me draft and refine this article. The final edits and perspective are my own.

Temperatures Miocene global 50 million years ago.
Click for larger image


About 33.9 MYA began the Oligocene. The climate dried and forests died out taking many species with them. Deserts, savanna, grassland replaced forests. Massive amounts of water became locked up as ice in Antarctica. Sea levels fell. Mountain building and marine organisms removed CO2 from the atmosphere. Midway through the Miocene the climate collapsed.

The Miocene Climate Optimum 14 MYA is what the article refers to. There was a far greater diversity of life then than now.

5 million years of climate N. hemisphere.
Click for larger image


Above is climate in the N. Hemisphere. From 5.3-2.6 million years is the Pliocene. ~2.6-11,700 years ago is the Pleistocene. The modern epoch is the Holocene.

Notice the globe in the upper right, then compare the globe in the center. The Central America seaway closed ~3 MYA. This changed global ocean currents blocking warm Pacific water flowing into the Atlantic. Sea ice appeared for the first time in the Arctic.

While CO2 levels over 5 million years was unchanged, the Northern Hemisphere climate went crazy.

It swung from one ice age extreme to warming period extreme after another. Over the last million years it has been mainly ice ages.

It is impossible to recreate the global temperatures of 14 million or 50 million years ago even with 800 PPM CO2. This is not the same earth.

420 PPM
Click for larger image


In conclusion, CO2 plays a small part in climate. If 420 PPM CO2 existed 14 MYA that produced a very different world than now, then present warming isn't likely caused by 0.0115% of CO2 added by humans.

See Ocean Currents Control Climate.

Stomata in plants.
Click for another image


Plant Stomata CO2 Climate Record

Stomata are pores that allow the exchange of air to extract CO2. The process uses transpiration or water evaporation to drive the exchange. This is defined as,

The movement of water in a plant is like a one-way street, it is unidirectional and it travels along this route: soil -> roots -> stem -> leaves -> air. The movement of water throughout a plant is driven by the loss of water through it's leaves, or transpiration.

The number of stomata is directly related to CO2 levels in the air. Higher CO2 levels of today accelerates plant growth and use less water.

The number of stomata is proportional to CO2 levels - more CO2, less stomata needed. Stomata in fossil plants is a proxy for CO2 levels when the plant lived.

The claims of 280 PPM CO2 being steady for thousands of years deforestation, etc. is nonsense. This claim came from low-resolution ice cores.

PPM is parts per million. CO2 at 420 PPM is 0.042% of the atmosphere.

Stomata studies show great variation from 260 PPM to 340 PPM with an average of 305 PPM. Yes, humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere of ~115 PPM or 0.0115%. That is ~25% of present levels.

See CO2 Record in Plant Fossils. PDF, not my work.

One great benefit of higher CO2 levels is greater plant growth, but is more beneficial to some plants than others.

Also see Changes in Plants With Climate, CO2

Despite the hopes of genocidal crackpots like Paul Ehrlich, Bill McKibben, Amory Lovins, etc. global food production has exploded over the last 50 years. This is due to a warmer climate, higher CO2 levels, and modern technology.


pH scale


Ocean pH and Objectivity

For those that are confused over terms:

Definition subjectivity: the quality of being based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. ; the quality of existing in someone's mind rather than the external world.

Definition objectivity: lack of favoritism toward one side or another : freedom from bias, not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

Science should always be objective. Social sciences are subjective and often infiltrate and replace objective science.

Note using terms such as "acid" for changes in ocean pH levels is scare mongering. Ocean pH has always changed. They claim, "This means that the ocean today is about 30 per cent more acidic than in pre-industrial times" yet have no physical evidence of what ocean pH was in 1750. This is subjective, based on belief alone.

To quote another source to put this issue in perspective:

"A pH of 7 is considered neutral, with anything below 7 considered acidic. Ocean pH averages 8.1, which is alkaline rather than acidic. Although climate models suggest the oceans' surface pH may have dropped from pH 8.2 to 8.1 since 1750, that change was never actually measured. The pH drop is merely a modeled conjecture..."

That is objective science that rejects conjecture and feelings. In fact on the issue of pH, we couldn't even measure such infinitesimal variations prior to the 1990s. Ditto pre-industrial levels in 1750 or even 1950.

With due respect I will not abide by computer modeling when they alter data or manufacture data to fill in the blanks. Those pushing this operate by mere authority, something religious fundamentalists engage in to shut down inquiry.

Cost of renewable subsides by Robert Bryce.
Click for larger image


Solar, Wind are Climate Corporatism

Corporatism, also known as crony capitalism, is a fusion of government interests with those of business, in particular large global corporations.

They thrive on government regulations that lock out competitors, as long as they don't cost themselves a lot of money. Corporatists love government handouts be it out outright cash or tax giveaways.

Green energy has become a corporatist' wet dream costing the public billions in higher energy costs and taxes.

Twin Falls, Idaho (AP) April 13, 2023. Hundreds of residents are protesting the Lava Ridge wind farm. This will chop up and wreck 118 Sq. miles (306 square kilometers) of public land. The 400 turbines will requires thousands of tons of steel, concrete, synthetic materials such as fiber glass, copper, gravel, etc. for the roads, power lines, and the turbines themselves. Plus millions of tons of fossil fuels.

Others are claiming 340 towers. How the heck can something that uses massive amounts non-renewable resources including fossil fuels be considered "clean energy?"

Going Green never felt so good for corporations banking billions in subsidies. Solar is no better than wind. The "capacity" of this destructive project was projected 1,000 mega watts.

In "Actually, Solar Is Getting 302 Times More In Federal Subsidies Than Nuclear" by Robert Bryce (SEP 27, 2023) notes,

The enormous subsidies for wind and solar show, once again, that America’s energy policy has been hijacked by climate corporatism, which, as I explained in April, is "the use of government power to increase the profits of big corporations at the expense of consumers - and in particular, at the expense of small (and mostly rural) landowners - in the name of climate change."

Ref. https://robertbryce.substack.com/p/actually-solar-is-getting-302-times

Yet a far less environmentally costly nuclear reactor project was canceled and would have used 36 acres for the same power. This "experimental" breeder reactor shouldn't be "experimental" anything. Breeder reactors were built decades ago and are proven technology. We know how to make new nuclear fuel from spent fuel rods, depleted uranium, thorium, etc.

Thousands of tons of this material are sitting around in storage, using this material will save the environmental destruction caused by mining new material in 3rd World countries. In fact the Canadian designed CANDU heavy water reactors can directly use spent fuel rod material. This would greatly simplify waste disposal, which we already know how to do.

To quote their own website:

In 1953, testing at EBR-I confirmed that a reactor could create (or breed) more fuel than it consumes. This pioneering reactor operated for 12 years before being shut down for the last time in December 1963.

What are we waiting for? They claim to be developing small modular reactors. To quote,

Renewables such as wind and solar produce intermittent power, and conventional power plants operate best and are more profitable when they operate at full capacity. When plants are forced to operate at less than full capacity, power generation becomes less cost-effective for customers and utilities.

Capacity factor by energy source.
Click for larger image


There is the issue of capacity factor. EIA.gov defines this as,

Capacity factor: The ratio of the electrical energy produced by a generating unit for the period of time considered to the electrical energy that could have been produced at continuous full power operation during the same period.

Nuclear by far blows away renewables and fossil fuels. That translates to fewer power plants producing more energy.

To quote on small modular reactors:

The CFPP plant will consist of 12 independent NuScale small modular reactors (SMRs) in a shared pool. These SMRs – 60 megawatts electric each – will be constructed offsite and shipped to the plant located in the desert west of Idaho Falls.

60 megawatts X 12 = 720 megawatts. Why not scale up to 100 megawatt reactors? That is 1,200 megawatts of real power with a small environmental footprint.

Ref. https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nations-first-small-modular-reactor-plant-power-nuclear-research-idaho-national



Subsidies are corporate welfare. This leads to political corruption, market distortions, and waste of resources. To quote,

"In the U.S. alone in 2016, $18.4 billion was spent on energy subsidies; $11 billion of that went to renewable energy and $3 billion to energy efficiency."

Source: Forbes 2018 and the University of Houston.

According to the National Academy of Sciences report "Understanding Climatic Change: a Program for Action" (1975) page P181, "the West Antarctic ice sheet has been disintegrating for many thousands of years."

Video Bill Gates Climate Agenda

In the above video Bill Gates in his own words at the World Economic Forum clearly states the climate agenda. The mass theft and redistribution of wealth from productive 1st World nations to low-achieving or failed 3rd World cesspools. This also involves the imposition of Green fascist dictates through force.

This is about money.

Video Gay Pride Parade Targets Kids.

This gay pride perverts parade is targeting children. LGBT-Pedophile parade has naked men exposing themselves to crowds including kids. Notice the gay unicorn and children at the 20 second mark. We don't have to stand for this sickness.


Ecology and Earth Science

Common Sense Versus Religion

Common sense environmentalism must place human needs first, mitigate actual pollution, make proper use of resources, and employ reasonable conservation methods. Humans must always come first, not nature.

Common sense environmentalism is better known as conservationism. I view man as a partner with Nature and part of it. They co-exist to each other's benefit. I seek practical solutions.

Environmentalism arose in the 1960s-70s. It is an anti-human, pantheistic system that deifies Nature. Nature is divine and must be preserved as "pristine" at all costs.

Environmentalists see man as separate from Nature, as a destructive force. They seek no solution for the co-existence of the two.

Conservationism needs to be done from a personal perspective and action, not centralized planning or government control. It will take education in technology. Learn how things work and what is involved. Stay away from fads. If one is on a spiritual adventure, go to church.

Environmentalism takes a collectivist view. All things are interrelated; there is no room for individualism. Conformity with a Nature-centered world view must become public policy - by force if needed.

Common sense environmentalism or conservationism places reason first. Environmentalism, like all religions, places emotion first. Recycling and eating organic foods have become a religious ritual with no regard for cost-benefit considerations.

The Great Extinctions by Norman MacLeod
Fig. 2 The Great Extinctions by Norman MacLeod

To begin, one must have a working knowledge of earth science, including geology and natural processes, to understand the climate debate.

The physical processes in nature today are the same as those in the past. To quote the definition of actualism from Norman MacLeod

:
"Actualism - the doctrine that the same (actual) processes observed to exist in the modern world existed in the past and can be invoked to account for or explain geological phenomena."

Let us look at an example today. The news headlines scream about the drought in Europe. "The worst in 500 years," proclaims the news outlets. Well, not really.

The 1919-22 drought killed millions across the world. This drought spread from Britain to Russia to China.

To quote The Times, "Day after Day of these African conditions is proving a severe strain on the English constitution...The country was in the grip of an astonishing prolonged drought."

You won't find that definition for some reason on a Google search. Geological "relates to the study of the earth's physical structure and substance." Without that knowledge, earth science, which includes climate, makes no sense.

Fig 2 illustrates one of my favorite earth science books. Norman MacLeod follows the scientific method, noting the ongoing debates in geology and paleontology. There is none of the "settled science" nonsense. He states, "the vagaries of the fossil record."

He explores five significant extinctions. At best, he calls the present hysterical claims of a "sixth extinction" hypothetical. I call it fear-mongering.

I prefer written textbooks over Google's narrow, rigged web searches that promote a particular narrative. I like direct observation and physical evidence, not political authority from paid activists.

In a high tech age that has seen the creation of artificial intelligence by computers, we are also seeing the creation of artificial stupidity by people who call themselves educators. Thomas Sowell

From Encyclopedia Britannica on Postmodernism:

Postmodernism, also spelled post-modernism, in Western philosophy, a late 20th-century movement characterized by broad skepticism, subjectivism, or relativism; a general suspicion of reason; and an acute sensitivity to the role of ideology in asserting and maintaining political and economic power.

January 2024 New Electronic Tutorials


Related YouTube videos.


Social justice (or environmental justice) is just Marxism. To quote,

CRITICAL THEORY is rooted in Marxism, and SOCIAL JUSTICE, as social justice warrior Joan Alway admits above, is application of Critical Theory "affecting revolutionary social change." That revolution may be labeled liberation, cultural transformation, or Christian Social Justice, but it begins with Progressives "deconstructing" traditional Western values and culture by redistributing wealth and power. Traditional Marxists tried and failed to accomplish redistribution by establishing class equality. Twenty-first century Progressives are attempting to accomplish it by establishing "identity" equality: sexual, gender, racial equality. These Progressive efforts are evident everywhere in American culture.

Ref. Critical Theory & Social Justice, URL 10/27/2022: https://jude3pca.org/critical-theory-and-social-justice/

Make no mistake about how Al Gore and other Progressives see the world. Liberal-Progressive anti-white racism has zero to do with advancing "people of color."

The www.thelancet.com Vol 385 April 11, 2015 Richard Horton wrote the following:

The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness...

Modern warming began in ~1850, not 1979. Before 1850 a prolonged cooling period was known as the Little Ice Age. The Thames froze over several times.

To quote www.historic-uk.com on Frost Fairs,

"Between 1600 and 1814, it was not uncommon for the River Thames to freeze over for up to two months at time. ... Britain (and the entire of the Northern Hemisphere) was locked in what is now known as the 'Little Ice Age.'"

Historical facts. CO2 levels were not responsible for the severe and sudden warming ending the Little Ice Age or the 1920s droughts.

To quote the Austin American Statesman July 18, 2022:

"Depending on where you lived, the two worst (droughts) of the past 100 years took place during the 1930s, when the Dust Bowl worsened the misery of the Great Depression, and during the 1950s..."

These facts don't discount present human activities causing current conditions. It is likely natural variation and perhaps human activity combined.

Sudden weather shifts are regular. To further quote on Texas,

"Three years — 1951, 1954 and 1956 — count among the driest in the state's history. ... The drought ended when an April 24, 1957, storm brought down 10 inches of rain, as well as hail and tornadoes, on wide stretches of Texas within a few hours. The rain continued for 32 days; floods followed."

Appalachian Voices commissioned a study in 2009. They claimed, "nearly 1.2 million acres had been surface mined for coal and more than 500 mountains destroyed by mountaintop removal coal mining."

In Wise County, VA., where I grew up, strip mining "covered 40% of the land area."

About 70 years ago, Virginia's black bear population was about 1,000. Today black bears thrive in Virginia. The black bear population is between 18,000 to 20,000 in 2021.

1607 Jamestown settled estimated Virginia deer population ~400,000.

In the 1920s-30s, Virginia estimated deer population was ~25,000, all but wiped out in Western Virginia. Large-scale coal mining begins in Southwest Virginia in the 1920s.

1926 deer restoration program begins. 1938 "over half the state devoid of deer."

1950 Virginia deer population ~150,000. 1970 Virginia deer population ~215,000. Large-scale strip mining exploded in Southwest Virginia in 1970.

1980 Virginia deer population ~422,000, 1988 Virginia deer population ~585,000.

2000 Virginia deer population ~900,000 and "stable."

Ref. Deer by the Dozen by Carol Heiser and Sally Mills.

The 2022 Virginia deer population, I estimate easily over 1 million! In other words, we have ~2.5 times as many deer in 2022 than in 1607.

Virginia's population in 1920 was ~2.3 million. In 2020 ~8.6 million. Nearly a fourfold increase.

We are awash in deer in our coal mining region, far too many. Wildlife flourishes on old strip mines.

How can this be howls environmental activists? Humans destroy nature, proclaim the activists.

No humans alter nature to the benefit of most cases to humans, plants, and animals. These results result from technology, affordable energy via fossil fuels, and government intervention.

We can certainly do better with technology, not politics or communist social engineering.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, many former communists found a new belief system. Socialism and statism (mixed with ecology forming environmental justice) are still the desired goal, but a little religion doesn't hurt.

In "Ecology and Spirituality" Leslie E. Sponsel notes the following:

"Secular approaches .. have also proven insufficient to turn things around for the better. Spirituality ... may help. Spirituality refers to mystical phenomena that include profoundly moving emotional experiences that can generate vision, meaning, purpose, and direction for an individual’s life in pursuit of the sacred. ... while in recent decades affiliation with religion declined, in contrast interest in spirituality increased. ... Ecology and spirituality are interrelated in various ways and degrees: spiritual ecology has grown exponentially since the 1990s."

This superstitious rubbish has no place in science. Gaia is superstition. Eastern mysticism is superstition. Notions of "biodiversity" have taken on many aspects of New Age mysticism. Science has nothing to do with a "direction" in one's life.

This religious rubbish permeates both ecology and climate change dogma. One's hatred of capitalism and desire to remake society, or anything social, has nothing to do with science.

A German member of the UN climate committee (a nonscientist) wrote the following:

"Basically, it is a big mistake to discuss climate policy apart from the big issues of globalization. The climate summit... is not a climate conference, but one of the biggest business conferences since the Second World War ... But one has to be clear: we are effectively redistributing world wealth through climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy..."

Their words not mine. Climate politics has never been about deer or black bears.

Bristolwatch banner.

The words of environmental activists:

1988 then Sen. Timothy Wirth, D-Colo said,

"We've got to...try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong...we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."

Bartender and New York Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says:

"Fighting climate change will be 'the civil rights movement of our generation'. It's inevitable that we will create jobs. We can use the transition to 100 percent renewable energy as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social and racial justice in the United States of America."

The above illustrates why also I'm a skeptic. Climate alarmism has been around for 100 years. At 65 I've read this alarmist hype for decades.

Climate change is real. It is largely due to natural causes. Their "end of the world" hysteria is irrational. It completely defies even basic earth science.

My You Tube Channel


Detroit Free Press notes in 2018:

Every demographic of students has seen a slide in third-grade literacy. White students, for instance, saw a 6.5 percentage point drop, from 58.2% proficient in 2014 to 51.7% in 2016. That compares with black students, who declined 3.3 percentage points, from 23.2% to 19.9%; Hispanic students, who declined 5.2 percentage points, from 37.2% to 32%, and Asian students, who declined 6.3 percentage points, from 69.7% to 63.4%. Meanwhile, low-income students (those eligible for free or reduced price lunch), declined 6.2 percentage points, from 35.3% to 29.1%; while higher-income students declined 6.4 percentage points, from 66.8% to 60.4%.

And:

Just 23% of Michigan's students graduate prepared for college or careers. And the state ranked 46th in fourth-grade reading and 37th in eighth-grade math on a rigorous national exam.

What the hell are they doing? I'll reveal what the problem really. The drops were not East Asians or European whites.


Web site Copyright Lewis Loflin, All rights reserved.
If using this material on another site, please provide a link back to my site.