This is from Creation magazine Vol. 42, No. 2 2020.
Archives
All posts for the month April, 2020
In case you do not receive the Patriot Post I thought it worth sharing this latest article. 
‘There is a clear and indisputable liability case to be made against China, which should include remuneration of the economic costs to our nation.
“Foreign influence is truly the Grecian horse to a republic. We cannot be too careful to exclude its influence.” —Alexander Hamilton (1793)
“I want every American to be prepared for the hard days that lie ahead. … This could be a hell of a bad two weeks.” —President Donald Trump in reference to the coming surge in testing and deaths resulting from COVID-19 disease
In 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump based his campaign on taking care of Americans first, and particularly on being less dependent on China and bringing our businesses home. As president, his actions to achieve those objectives with China have been much bolder than any president in history.
Given the current CV19 assault on our nation and the world, Trump’s efforts to unhitch America’s economy from China’s corrupt regime seem more prophetic by the minute.
People, we are in a “war,” as Trump has declared, and the first salvos were fired by our primary global adversary, communist China. That war is not only dangerous to the health of America and the world, but it is also having a significant impact on our national-security readiness — and I can assure you our adversaries, including China, are taking note.
As I’ve written previously, extricating ourselves and the economy that sustains us from the massive shutdown necessitated by the spread of this disease is going to be incredibly difficult and expensive, both in terms of human life and national treasure. Formulating and implementing an exit strategy will be the most difficult and complex policy decision by any president in decades, and I’m grateful that this unprecedented shutdown began during a record strong economy. Were it not, we’d be in a much worse place — as hard as that is to imagine.
But on the other side of the immediate crisis looms this fact: There is a clear and indisputable liability case to be made against China — one that should include remuneration of the economic costs to our nation and other penalties. I proposed that President Trump send communist dictator Xi Jinping the bill for the catastrophic damage caused by the CCP’s abject and willful negligence in allowing CV19 to carpet-bomb our nation and its people — and all those worldwide. (More on that below.)
For the record, that systemic institutional negligence began in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in November 2019 — though there were most certainly earlier cases of this virus.
For two months, under the direction of Xi Jinping, China actively concealed evidence of the emerging threat and likely pandemic, systematically covering up the viral outbreak in China, which resulted in the spread of CV19 here in the U.S.
China’s reports on CV19 deaths in Wuhan were, and remain, spurious, and the low fatality data being reported for Beijing, Shanghai, and other mass urban centers defies logic and strains credulity. Given the lethality of SARS-CoV-2, the death toll among Red China’s almost 1.4 billion people, most of whom are impoverished, is many times higher than the official data coming from Xi’s communist regime.
On 31 January — the same day President Trump issued his China travel ban (amid the objections of Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats) — we noted, “Officially, the communist Chinese government claims about 220 deaths and 10,000 infections. Our sources indicate that the actual rates of infection and deaths in China are much higher, and, in fact, official reports may only represent 5-7% of the actual dead and infected. The so-called ‘pop-up hospitals’ that were constructed across Hubei Province where the outbreak originated doubled as isolation morgues.”
For that reason, nobody should believe anything the communist Chinese regime is reporting through its puppet, the UN’s World Health Organization, and mitigating actions should not rely to any degree on information provided by China.
Despite the decisive actions taken by the United States since the WHO reported China’s initial disclosure of the virus on 31 December 2019, the Wuhan coronavirus was already in our country — and that is a key point.
How many deaths, both here and worldwide, could’ve been spared if China had simply been forthcoming instead of having deceived the world?
The most condemning evidence of China’s abject negligence is the fact that if Xi had informed the world just three weeks earlier, it could have reduced the spread by 95%.
I’ve compiled more details about China’s disinformation and cover-up campaign, but suffice it to say that our sources in the intelligence community conclude that campaign is designed to help Xi’s communist politburo counter and deflect any claims by the U.S. that the SARS-CoV-2 release is associated with the regime’s deadly pathogen labs in Wuhan.
Notably, some of the earliest concerns about the release of this dangerous pathogen were raised in January by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), a U.S. Army veteran who made this connection between SARS-CoV-2 and the Wuhan Institute of Virology: “We know that just a few miles away from that food market [where the disease was first contracted] is China’s only biosafety level 4 super laboratory, which researches human infectious diseases.” Cotton added: “The Chinese Communist Party has once again been caught red-handed covering up, suppressing, and censoring a serious public health risk, which could increasingly be a global public health risk. For weeks, China did not come clean about the coronavirus that they first said was only being passed from animals to humans in a seafood market in Wuhan in China.”
To that end and for the record: The Wuhan market where CV19 was first contracted is near China’s only P4 (Pathogen Level 4) super laboratory. The Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology is engaged in research on the Ebola, Nipah, and Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever viruses — and, yes, coronavirus variants. And the institute has clear ties to the communist regime’s bioweapons programs.
There is now sufficient evidence that the Chinese had isolated and researched SARS-CoV-2 virus, and that they knew the likely consequences if it were released.
National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien affirmed Cotton’s suppression assessment. “This outbreak in Wuhan was covered up,” said O’Brien. “There’s lots of open-source reporting from China, from Chinese nationals, that the doctors involved were either silenced or put in isolation … so that the word of this virus could not get out. It probably cost the world community two months [of prep time].”
According to O’Brien, “If we’d had those [two months] and been able to sequence the virus, and had the cooperation necessary from the Chinese — had a WHO team been on the ground, had a CDC team, which we’d offered, been on the ground — I think we could have dramatically curtailed what happened both in China and what’s now happening across the world. … We’ve sent our condolences to China, but now we’re in a place where we’re having to deal with the crisis here.”
This week, as the CV19 Task Force extended until 30 April its original 15-day mandate to slow the spread of the virus, Sen. Cotton reiterated: “The Chinese Communist Party is still lying today, as they were in December and January, and that’s why what could have been a local problem in Wuhan turned into a global pandemic. … As for what happened in that biosafety Level 4 laboratory, that super lab in Wuhan, we still don’t know because the Chinese CP refuses to come clean.”
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, stated succinctly, “This is one of the worst cover-ups in human history, and now the world is facing a global pandemic.”
President Trump has declared that the Chinese will be held accountable “when they lose things like the manufacturing capacity that we’ve outsourced to them or when other democratic governments around the world respond to their people who know that China is responsible for this virus.”
Such steps are long overdue, and the president deserves credit for his actions to this end, despite all the globalist political opposition. But there’s a more direct way to send China the bill.
As President Trump and Congress return to the deepening well of national debt to authorize the treasury to print trillions of dollars in relief payments to be mailed nationwide, recall that at the end of 2019, when China was still concealing the pandemic it seeded worldwide, it held $1.07 trillion in U.S. debt.
That’s almost 16% of the $6.7 trillion in treasury bills, notes, and bonds then held by other countries.
One way to seek some remuneration for China’s liability is to send Xi Jinping the bill for the catastrophic damage caused by China’s abject and willful negligence. President Trump should therefore construct a “default option” on debt held by China as a liability offset for the debt our nation is now incurring as a result of China’s willful and catastrophic deception. We should also seize Chinese assets in the U.S., including equity holdings in U.S. companies.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, then-candidate Trump said correctly: “The United States government [will] never have to default because you print the money. I hate to tell you. So there’s never a default.” Of course, printing money, which is exactly what we’re doing to help American wage-earners and businesses through the current government-induced partial economic shutdown, is inflationary.
Thus, in addition to seizing Chinese assets and equity holdings in the U.S., the president should offer Xi Jinping the option of forgiving the U.S. debt held by China. And when Xi balks, as he certainly will, I suggest President Trump authorize the U.S. Treasury to print $1.07 trillion in “trade dollar notes” as repayment for the debt currently held by China. Then Xi can keep those notes in reserve to use as toilet paper during the next pandemic.
Yes, I know this is the first day of April, sometimes known as April Fools’ Day, but I’m not foolin’. As our president has already declared, “China is responsible for this virus.” And one way or the other, China must pay.
And on a final note to bring this around to who we are…
“The battle in which we’re now engaged has inflicted many hardships on our nation and our families. … But through it all, the world has witnessed the unyielding resolve of our incredible American people. We are not only a country of vast resources; we’re a nation of colossal strength, towering spirit, soaring patriotism, and exceptional character. … We are one family, bound together by love and loyalty. … With the determination of the American people, and with the grace of God, we will win this war.” —President Trump’ https://patriotpost.us/alexander/69656-cv19-made-in-china-send-xi-the-bill-2020-04-01
Photo by Google
Believe it or not ‘The Arlington County Police Department’s Homicide/Robbery Unit is investigating a shooting that took place in the Green Valley neighborhood on the morning of March 29, 2020.
At approximately 4:53 a.m., police were dispatched to the report of trouble unknown in the 2400 block of Shirlington Road. The preliminary investigation indicates that three subjects forced entry into a business and began stealing cash and merchandise. An employee inside a secure back room heard the break in, retrieved a firearm, opened the door to the sales floor and discharged the weapon, striking one juvenile subject. The employee retreated to the back room but reentered the sales floor and discharged his weapon again as the subjects were attempting to flee the business.
Arriving officers located the injured juvenile subject outside the business. He was transported by medics to an area hospital with injuries that are considered serious but non-life threatening. The other two subjects fled the scene on foot prior to police arrival.
Following consultation with the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office, the employee, Hamzeh Abushariah, 33, of Washington D.C. was charged with Malicious Wounding, Reckless Handling of a Firearm and Violation of a Protective Order. He is being held without bond.
Additional charges related to the breaking and entering are anticipated at a later date.
This incident remains an active criminal investigation. Anyone with information related to this investigation is asked to contact Detective Henretty of the Arlington County Police Department’s Homicide/Robbery Unit at 703-228-4237 or Mhenretty@ arlingtonva.us. Information may also be provided anonymously through the Arlington County Crime Solvers hotline at 1-866-411-TIPS (8477).’ https://www.arlnow.com/2020/03/29/police-store-employee-charged-after-shooting-would-be-thief/
‘A couple of defense attorneys weighed in on Twitter:
Alden Yako, Esq.@YakoLawSelf-defense, not a criminal. One officer said he should’ve ran out the back door. Held without bond. Another prosecutorial beauty. #stores #smokeshop #employee #Arlington #Virginia #prosecutors #SelfDefense #LawEnforcement #Lawyerhttps://wjla.com/news/local/arlington-employee-charged-shooting-robbers-owner-speaks-out …
Arlington employee charged for shooting robbers in middle of the night, owner speaks out
The owner of a South Arlington smoke shop is outraged after his employee was charged with multiple crimes for shooting a suspect who had allegedly broken into the business. That owner says the…
Robert Barnes@Barnes_LawAsserting self-defense now a crime? https://www.whsv.com/content/news/Virginia-police-Man-charged-with-shooting-break-in-suspect-569227261.html …
Virginia police: Man charged with shooting break-in suspect
Police in Virginia say they charged a man with shooting and wounding a juvenile suspect accused of breaking into a business to steal cash and merchandise.
China is the culprit in this devastation of the Western world! Here is an interesting transcript of Tucker Carlson’s programme of 1 April, 2020. 
‘On February 6, scientists from the South China University of Technology uploaded a paper on the origins of the Coronavirus. At the time, the official death toll in China from the epidemic was 564. The paper made a number of notable observations and claims that are worth knowing about. We are not endorsing any of these conclusions. We can’t. We haven’t independently confirmed them. But you should keep in mind that these findings come from Chinese scientists, who work for a university controlled by the Chinese government. Whatever else they are, these views are probably not racist anti-Chinese propaganda. Here’s what the paper says:
First, the scientists confirmed what scientists around the world have said they believe: the virus mostly likely came from an animal known as the Intermediate Horseshoe Bat. There are no known colonies of this bat within 900 kilometers of Wuhan. Nor is there evidence they were sold in the Wuhan wet market, despite many claims in American media to the contrary. Interviews with almost 60 people who frequented the market confirmed there were no horseshoe bats for sale there.
So where did the virus-carrying bats come from? The paper says this, quote: “We screened the area around the market and identified two laboratories conducting research on bat coronavirus.” Within a few hundred yards of the wet market was something called the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention. According to public reports, the center used Intermediate Horseshoe Bats for research. About seven miles away was another facility, called the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The virology institute also conducted research on Intermediate Horseshoe Bats.
South China University scientists concluded that the Coronavirus pandemic likely came from one of these two labs. They noted that a scientist at the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention had been exposed to the blood and urine of bats. They also suggested that infected tissue samples from research animals may have wound up in the Wuhan wet market. They ended their paper this way. Quote: “The killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan. Safety levels may need to be reinforced in high risk, bio-hazardous laboratories. Regulations may be taken to relocate these laboratories far away from city center and other densely populated places.” End quote.
That paper has been online for nearly two months. So far, it’s been virtually ignored. Almost nobody in American journalism has dared to write about it. The few who have, were immediately attacked as dangerous conspiracy theorists. Instead of assessing what seemed like rational conclusions in the Chinese paper, there was a spate of American news stories and academic research designed to show that the Coronvirus absolutely could not have been engineered in a Chinese lab as a bioweapon. They sounded supremely confident of that. But do they really know it? No, they don’t. As a factual matter, it is impossible for western scientists to settle the question either way. So they amped up the rhetoric, hoping you wouldn’t notice. A post on the National Institutes of Health website, written by NIH director Francis Collins, dismisses any such speculation as quote “outrageous.” Keep in mind, NIH is supposed to be keeping you safe from disease, not running political interference for hostile foreign governments. This is how they’re spending their time, as Americans die in the middle of a global pandemic.
And still, no one addressed the substance of the claims. The South China University paper concludes that the virus probably escaped accidentally from a lab in Wuhan. It says nothing about bioweapons. Yet the NIH, and USA Today and countless others, have devoted many thousands of words to scolding you for thinking the virus may have been a form of biological warfare. That’s a totally different claim. And it’s not accidental. One of the surest signs that people are lying to you is when they answer questions you didn’t ask. That’s exactly what the professional class is doing now, and they’re doing it on many fronts: They’re lying to you. They’re claiming to know things they don’t. They’re dismissing the obvious as impossible. They’re blaming you for their failures. The media are helping them do it. The stakes are too high to let them do this. So no matter what, stay skeptical. Remain rational. Gather your own evidence. Come to your own conclusions. At this point, you have no choice.’ Source for this was https://pjmedia.com/trending/did-covid-19-originate-in-a-chinese-lab-and-why-is-it-crazy-to-ask/?utm_source=pjmedia&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=&bcid=08b5a1e2f2263b83e918fb56d7a12a3e&recip=26169367
I had never heard of KrisAnne Hall before but a little search showed a lot of information on her which includes her own web site (https://krisannehall.com/index.php) and YouTube channell. This is her autobiography as given there.
‘KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor, fired after teaching the Constitution to TEA Party groups – she would not sacrifice liberty for a paycheck. She is a disabled veteran of the US Army, a Russian linguist, a mother, a pastor’s wife and a patriot. She now travels the country and teaches the Constitution and the history that gave us our founding documents. KrisAnne Hall does not just teach the Constitution, she lays the foundations that show how reliable and relevant our founding documents are today.’
Here is the entire article. 
‘Coronavirus Or No Coronavirus, Feds Cannot Shut Down Churches
‘A bloody path was trod to bring religious freedom to modern America. Christian martyrs and patriots secured our God-given right to freedom of religion with their suffering and even with their lives.
Religious freedom in America is not simply a fundamental right, but a foundational one. The settlements of the first American colonies were established in the flight from oppressive religious persecution and the struggle continued even on these shores. From the beating of Obadiah Holmes, the lynching of Quakers and the imprisonment of 50 Baptist preachers who were defended by a fiery attorney named Patrick Henry, religious liberty has been something American Christians have always been willing to stand for or even to die for.
This history and more gave us our First Amendment to the Constitution and its underlying principle of religious conscience, which has been part of the bedrock of our republic for more than two centuries.
The “Father of the Constitution” and fourth President James Madison wrote in 1792, “Conscience is the most sacred of all property … the exercise of that, being a natural and unalienable right. To guard a man’s house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact faith, can give no title to invade a man’s conscience which is more sacred than his castle.”
Indeed prohibitions upon the government’s authority to infringe, limit or dictate the operation of the church had been codified in western law long before the settlement of American colonies.
Many American Christians have heard of Thomas Jefferson’s famous letter to the Danbury Baptists ensuring them that America would never return to a time where the government sought to dictate the operations of the church. But long before 1802, Jefferson’s “wall of separation of church and state” that kept government outside the sacred walls of the church was one alluded to by King Henry I in the 1100 Charter of Liberties.
Henry declared the body of the church to be free from government intrusions. Two centuries later, one of the tipping points in the fight that brought us Magna Carta was the crown’s attempt to interfere in the free operation of the church. This charter history of our founding documents continued its development through the Grand Remonstrance of 1641 and the English Bill of Rights of 1689 under which our founders arrived in this New World.
Each of these installments, which would later culminate in our founding documents; all happened amid the fight for religious liberty.
However, even with the clear language of our First Amendment and the history that should inform our actions, the struggle to maintain this essential right from the control of government continues to this day. Modern lawmakers like to carve out excuses and causes for government intrusions into our inherent rights when some imagined need arises.
William Pitt, The Younger, warned in 1783, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.”
Necessity seems to always be the most powerful tool to persuade the masses into accepting these infringements. Today, because of the coronavirus scare, religious liberty is facing a huge “necessity plea” in the form of limits upon assembly. At least one church has been descended upon by police and threatened with the National Guard for having more than 250 people attend.
According to the courts, a law that infringes upon a fundamental right like freedom of religion must overcome certain challenges: The law must not be arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable. The law must be equally applied to secular businesses and it must satisfy a qualification of being the least restrictive means necessary to accomplish a compelling governmental interest.
The restrictions imposed by governors and municipalities upon the number of people who can assemble in a private church gathering appears to fail these tests.
First, these numerical restrictions are completely arbitrary in nature. There has been no tested nor proven scientific or medical data to show us what “number” of people that congregate together are a danger to society. The number has varied from place to place and moment by moment. Somewhere it’s 50, other places its 10 and there are still other variations.
When politicians assign an “acceptable” number of people allowed in a private church, they are reducing our right to freedom of religion to a first come, first served privilege. Our first foundational document reads: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” The government deciding who can attend a service by way of a numerical limit does not demonstrate an equality of rights and ought to be seen as a per se violation of the principle of separation of church and state.
Secondly, these laws are not being applied equally upon secular businesses and other institutions. When arbitrary number limits are applied to a church and not to a library, post office, grocery store or hotel gym, there is not equal application.
These laws try to justify unequal application based upon the definition of essential services. By what authority does the government declare the church nonessential? The Church is a place where people turn for help and for comfort in a climate of fear and uncertainty. In a time of crisis, people are fearful and in need of comfort and community, more than ever before. Even people who do not attend church regularly, or perhaps never go to church, need to know that there is somewhere for them to go when they need help.
Throughout history, the church has been viewed as an essential part of society, a refuge in time of trouble or need, a place of peace and a sanctuary for the weary, even a place of healing and provision. More salient for believers is that the Bible pointedly addresses the issue of assembling during troubled times: “not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.” (Heb. 10:25) Many in the church take this as a solemn command.
To deny a Christian his obligation to gather with his local body is to put him at odds with a fundamental tenet of the faith. For a believer in Christ there are few things as essential as the gathering of the body of Christ in the study of God’s Word and worship of His Glory. As a matter of fact, the Bible teaches that since we are eternal beings in this temporary world, God’s word is more essential than food: “But he answered, ‘It is written, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.”‘” (Mt. 4:4, ESV)
When those in government can assign a label of nonessential to the practice of religion, then government is taking a very serious and dangerous role of defining religion, which is expressly forbidden in our Bill of Rights and in a majority of our state constitutions.
Finally, these restrictions are not reasonable and not the least restrictive means necessary. The case law used to define reasonableness in these laws are easily distinguishable. In Moore v. Draper, the court held that Moore could be quarantined and prevented from attending church because he had Tuberculosis. The court also said that once he was healthy he could no longer be reasonably or legally quarantined and prevented from attending church.
The current laws restricting the number of attendees of a church are not restrictions on one unhealthy individual. They are restrictions upon a group of healthy people, which the court said would be unreasonable.
Additionally, the court did not order the entire church to be shut down to keep Moore healthy, which is exactly what these laws are trying to suggest is a reasonable and constitutional solution.
Limiting an entire congregation of people for the safety of those who may be at risk of infection does not meet the standard of Moore, nor can it be seen as the least restrictive means necessary. The case of Varholy v. Sweat can be distinguishable for the same reasons as Moore.
Finally, in Employment Division vs. Smith, the court held that the outlawed use of peyote is not an unreasonable interference upon freedom of religion as it was a “neutral, generally applicable law.” Because the current restrictions upon church assemblies are not generally applicable to every place where people will congregate, this case is not controlling.
Although it is argued the “protection of the public health is one of the prime duties resting upon the State” we cannot escape the reality that the first prime duty of every state is codified in the Declaration of Independence: “… that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
There is nothing in the law or precedent to establish a blanket and arbitrary assertion of “state of emergency” as an unquestionable authority.
There is also nothing in the law or precedent to support a restriction on the number of people who can assemble in a church, for health reasons or otherwise, as a criterion for denying the essential right of freedom of religion.
There is, however, everything in history and experience that says such actions by government are unreasonable and oppressive restrictions upon the essential and inherent right of freedom of religion.
Rev. Jonathan Witherspoon, founder of Princeton University gave this warning: “There is not a single instance in history in which civil liberty was lost, and religious liberty preserved entire.”
Indeed, when Peter and the apostles were told by law not to gather, preach or lay hands on the sick for God to grant them healing on threat of prison, they chose to continue to practice their faith. After they escaped from prison and were told by God to go back and assemble with the people and preach and heal, they did exactly that.
And when they were questioned by the government as to why they continued to break this law, the apostles did not hesitate or make excuse, they simply said, “We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29)
True to the history that makes America great, our pastors and church members should not so easily surrender a fundamental rights so faithfully contended for by those who have gone before.
Who will stand and not let the landmarks be moved?’ https://www.westernjournal.com/krisanne-hall-coronavirus-no-coronavirus-feds-cannot-shut-churches/
When will the Western Communist Islamic loving Leftists wake up?!
- ‘In an article in Xinhua, one of the Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpieces, Beijing threatened to halt pharmaceutical exports, after which America would be “plunged into the mighty sea of coronavirus… — Yanzhong Huang, senior fellow for global health, Council on Foreign Relations, Twitter, March 4, 2020.
- China’s leaders are probably hoping that you cannot challenge a powerhouse that is selling you most of your vital medications.
- “Hidden behind declarations of solidarity, China plans to buy out our troubled companies and infrastructure” — Bild, March 19, 2020.
- Italy, a country hit hard by China’s coronavirus pandemic, is now at the center of a strategic Chinese propaganda campaign. Beijing has sent doctors and supplies to Italy and is doing the same all over Europe. In Italy you can see posters saying, “Go, China!” China is trying to buy our silence and complicity. Sadly, that is already taking place.
- China is not helping at this point out of “solidarity”. The Chinese regime is now seeking to portray itself as the world’s savior. Beijing, at the beginning of the pandemic, did not care about the lives of even its own people: it was busy censoring the news.
- “The West is so tolerant, passive, accommodating and naive towards Beijing. Westerners… are seduced like an old man in front of a young girl…. Europe shows all its weakness. It does not realize that the Chinese offensive threatens its freedom and values”. — Liao Yiwu, Chinese writer exiled in Berlin, Le Point International, April 6, 2019.’ https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15804/china-duplicity
This coronavirus is is today’s Communist way of war. Here in Australia the Federal Government will be strapped with financial debt for years to come and if the Climate scamming Left gain power it can only get worse. We MUST wake up to this enemy that seems to have the Left in the palm of their hands.
Who can you trust today? Well, you would think you could trust the people who record the weather BUT think again! For what it’s worth and because this is my blog, my personal opinion is, that the BOM has sold out to the Climate Change Scammers. Sadly, the Federal Government pours millions into this organization. Truly, ‘This is a real scandal. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) changed the past temperature record twice, ‘cooling the past.’ But, in reality, if you look at their raw official data, it is plain to see that there has been no more hot days in Australia than usual. The data goes back to at least 1910.
The following video reveals how the past Australian temperature record has been ‘cooled’ by at least 1.5 degrees C (or 3 degrees F) in two separate revisions. That means scientists changed the values of past temperature records before the 1990s. The effect is that it artificially makes it appear that the past few decades have been hotter than any decade prior to that time. This gives the appearance that the country has been hotter in recent times. But that claim is totally false.
The big scandal here is two fold. Firstly, the fact alone that current scientists think that they can legitimately tamper with past temperature records. The second is much more significant. How do you know that what you decide on regarding the past (when no one has access to the past) is in any way accurate? Simply put, you can’t know.
No one has a time machine. No one can know what happened in the past. No scientist, no matter matter how smart he thinks he is can know what happened in the past. The best you can do is to rely on a record of an observer who recorded something at some past moment of time. You have to take that record on its face value. You can’t measure anything that happened in the past.
This is why we have official birth certificates. It was the observers present at your birth that essentially testify, in an official document, that you were born at such a time and on such a date. They were there. Some future scientist, who was not there, can’t later correct that record.
The past Australian temperatures were usually recorded at Post Offices and they were recorded in official notebooks. Those notebooks are kept in the National Archive. But now we have modern day scientists who claim to know better and, under the excuse of ‘homogenising’ the data, they have changed the past temperatures, and ‘cooled’ it is all cases. So the alleged ‘real’ temperatures as recorded in the notebooks were in error, i.e. they all allegedly had some systematic error.
What they are claiming is that, because electronic (PRT) thermometers were introduced in the 1990s, the prior measurements made with Mercury thermometers did not have the same calibration as the modern PRTs. But fallible humans with a global warming bias are the ones who changed the historical records. And who would doubt their bone fides in doing that? And the problem, as you can plainly see, is the weakness of historical science. It’s all very Orwellian to say the least.’https://biblescienceforum.com/2020/03/29/australian-bom-cools-the-past/
whatyareckon 