Mike Tagliavia for State Rep

Just did an interview with @IvanRaiklin who forced me to get an account

[Peter Clack @PeterDClack]

For forty years we’ve been told the planet has a single 'global average temperature'—a made-up figure treated as more credible than the weather outside your own window.

The great flaw in this is that there really is no one temperature scenario that applies to any geographical point anywhere on Earth. Not in the way people imagine, any more than there’s a single 'global mood' or 'sense of irony. If you say, 'The planet's average temperature is 15°C', it means absolutely nothing to a person struggling across frost-bitten Siberia or sipping a piña colada on a humid summer's night in Brazil. It's meaningless to human geography and policy.

Statistically, you can average the temperature of a polar ice cap and the Sahara Desert, but the resulting number describes a place that doesn't exist. It’s a computer model—not reality. The concept of a single global temperature metric only makes sense from a cosmic distance. It's a planetary metric, designed for satellites, not human life or geography.

When international bodies focus entirely on moving a single global average by 0.1°C, they treat the Earth as a Lego land thermodynamic system. But the planet doesn't experience climate that way. Earth's climate is fractured into multiple distinct climate zones (roughly 14 separate scenarios) based on lived experiences. All of them are entirely regional, dictated by local topography, ocean currents, vegetation cover, and atmospheric pressure systems.

Tourism campaigns market Hawaii as an idyllic, uniform tropical paradise. But anyone who's actually been there knows the island contains roughly 10 of the world’s 14 distinct climate zones, ranging from continuously wet tropical rainforests to arid deserts, and even alpine tundra on top of Mauna Kea where it snows.

International institutions are quietly backing away from their most extreme 'collapse' scenarios. The entire apparatus was built on a flawed premise - trying to govern the world based on a single, aggregated temperature marker that no human ever actually experiences. The Hawaii analogy shows how local reality obliterates uniform narratives.

The true danger isn't a minor shift in a global statistical average, but the civilisational paralysis from letting central bureaucracies replace reality with ideology.

When an immense institutional and bureaucratic apparatus is built around a specific set of numbers, targets and narratives, it develops an enormous amount of structural inertia. It doesn't just stop or turn on a dime because the underlying assumptions shift.

We’ve elevated heavily processed, continent-sized guesswork into a Holy Scripture, then handed trillion-dollar policy levers to people who treat any questioning of the guess as heresy.

It turns out there is no thermometer big enough to measure 'the Earth'.

[Tom Hennessy @Tomhennessey69]

The Barnstable County Assembly on Cape Cod, mostly comprised of anti-White leftists, was forced to take public comments yesterday on a new measure that would hamstring ICE from enforcing immigration law in the area. A local patriot managed to show up between work shifts and delivered an incredible speech.

[Peter Clack @PeterDClack]

Wind and solar aren't the future - they are a high-maintenance, low-yield, asset-degrading collection of assorted technologies.

Ultimately, the actual physics makes them extremely inefficient and they fail to deliver a true net profit to the citizens forced to subsidise them. We are told wind and solar are the limitless, romantic future of energy. But when you strip away the romance, wind and solar installations are not pristine, eternal monuments to progress.

The reality is, they are complex jumbles of electronics, specialised glass, composite blades and concrete foundations. Like any domestic appliance, they degrade, malfunction, and eventually wear out.

Whether it is a 'minor rural block' or a massive multi-million-dollar commercial farm, the financial equation is plagued by intermittency. Because these technologies only work sometimes, they require trillions in redundant grid infrastructure, backup gas plants, or toxic, short-lived battery arrays just to keep the lights on.

The narrative promises clean, free power from the sky. But physics doesn't care about narratives. Both wind and solar are bound by immutable, proven physical barriers that guarantee they can never deliver the promised utopian returns.

A wind turbine cannot simply absorb all the energy passing through it. In 1919, physicist Albert Betz proved that if a turbine extracted 100% of the wind’s kinetic energy, the air behind the blades would stop moving entirely, blocking any new wind from entering. The absolute mathematical maximum efficiency for any open-airflow turbine is 59.3%.

Because of this physical wall, real-world utility turbines max out at around 45% efficiency in perfect conditions. But because the wind rarely blows at perfect speeds, their actual annual output (capacity factor) sits at a dismal 25% to 35%. They aren't magical power plants; they are mechanical bottlenecks.

Solar panels face an equally rigid thermodynamic wall. Standard silicon panels have a maximum theoretical efficiency of roughly 33% because nearly half of all incoming solar energy is simply too powerful to be captured and is instantly lost as heat, while another chunk of photons passes right through the material like a ghost.

Millions of homeowners who bought into rooftop solar since the late 2000s are discovering the financial math didn't hold up. As early subsidies and high buy-back tariffs evaporated, owners were left with creeping daily grid supply charges and degrading panels. After only 10 to 15 years, the costly inverters fail, leaving properties with expensive, non-functioning roof clutter.

The fuel might seem to be free, but catching it is an incredibly expensive, resource-intensive and physically limited endeavor.

Reality will always win.

[Electroverse @Electroversenet]

A new study analyzed daily temperatures from 992 long-running weather stations across 29 countries covering the years 1899 to 2024.

Then it compared those temperatures to cumulative human CO2 emissions.

They don't match.

From 1899 to 1940, the planet warmed at a rate of 0.022 C per year, even though emissions were low.

Then from 1941 to 1982, temperatures cooled, despite CO2 emissions more than tripling.

From 1983 to 2024, warming returned, but slower than before, at a rate of 0.017 C per year, even as emissions rose 8.6 times higher than during the earlier warming phase.

As the author concludes, "These findings challenge the conventional assumption that human-induced CO2 is the primary driver of global warming."

[Dangerous Thoughts @DangerousThinkg]

50% of all murders in the United States happen in 2% of the counties

Our favorite Canadian living in the United States explores the statistic

Guess which counties and cities

[Peter Clack @PeterDClack]

CO₂ does not control the climate. It never has. It is not the master dial of the Earth’s temperature, nor is it the architect of our modern anxieties.

Carbon dioxide doesn't cause excessive rainfall, droughts, or the collapse of coastal cliffs. Nor is it responsible for the fractures in human society—terrorism, urban violence, obesity or the drug crisis. These are the products of a human civilization that has survived its own annihilation by the narrowest of margins, persisting for 300,000 years largely through a stroke of cosmic luck.

Yet, for four decades, a relentless climate war has force-fed the world a diet of crisis and warming hysteria. It insists that CO₂ is the root of all evil—that it is our fault and it is the gas's fault. But the truth is indifferent: CO₂ doesn't care. It is not demonic. It is not pollution. It is the foundation of life on Earth.

Without it, Earth would be a silent, sterile rock, inhabited only by bacteria. It was CO₂ that empowered cyanobacteria to unlock the miracle of photosynthesis, slowly flooding the world with the 'waste product' we call oxygen. Before this, the oceans were dark with iron, the skies were not blue, and the world was effectively lifeless. We should be thankful for this gas of life, rather than inventing doomsday scenarios to vilify it.

If we look at the true scale of our planet, the single greatest factor affecting Earth’s geology is tectonic continental flow. This slow, majestic dance of crustal plates shapes our continents and redirects the great ocean currents. This is nature at work.

Today, CO₂ is a mere trace gas at 427 ppm (0.04%). While it is a mighty driver for biology, it is at some of its lowest levels in planetary history. During the Cambrian Period, concentrations were upwards of 4,000 to 8,000 ppm. If those massive levels did not trigger an 'irreversible environmental collapse', it is illogical to assume today’s trace amounts will.

Furthermore, water vapor remains the dominant greenhouse gas, reaching concentrations of 40,000 ppm (4%) in the tropics. It is responsible for the vast majority of the greenhouse effect, yet it is sidelined in favor of the carbon narrative.

History matters. For hundreds of millions of years, CO₂ has not been the deciding factor in global temperature. Homo sapiens evolved during the Late Cenozoic Ice Age, which began 34 million years ago when Antarctica became entombed in ice. Our entire history has unfolded within the Quaternary glaciation, surviving 100,000-year cycles of icehouse conditions.

Almost every meaningful invention, every empire, and every leap in human progress occurred within the brief, warm window of the Holocene. We have never not lived in an ice age. We have survived global upheavals before, but we may not survive a self-imposed collapse into a new medieval dark age driven by ideological fear.

[Today in History @TodayinHistory]

This may be the most articulate response I’ve ever heard to this question.

[Thomas Sowell Quotes @ThomasSowell]

“In the academic world, diversity means black leftists, white leftists, female leftists, and Hispanic leftists. Demographic diversity conceals ideological conformity.”

— Thomas Sowell

[Thomas Sowell Quotes @ThomasSowell]

"If you believe in equal rights, then what do ‘women's rights,’ ‘gay rights,’ etc. mean? Either they are redundant or they are violations of the principle of equal rights for all."

— Thomas Sowell

[Peter Clack @PeterDClack]

All the spent fuel produced by the US nuclear industry over 60 years would fit on a single football field stacked less than 10 yards high.

This highlights the staggering difference in scale between nuclear and wind waste. It comes down to volume, density and containment. Because this volume of spent fuel is so small, it's easily contained in steel-and-concrete dry casks, engineered to withstand missile impacts and natural disasters. It has a perfect safety record regarding water table contamination.

By contrast, wind power requires roughly 10 times more concrete and 90 times more steel in material intensity per terawatt-hour. While a blade is 'stable' in a landfill, the sheer scale of unrecyclable composite waste - thousands of tons every year - creates a massive, uncontained environmental footprint.

This stretches off to infinity as entire generations of wind turbines must be written off and replaced at least every 20 years.

We manage nuclear 'waste' as a high-value byproduct - but we simply bury turbine waste on a scale of hundreds of locomotives and hope for the best. By contrast, the spent nuclear fuel isn’t ‘waste' at all. That is a fundamental misconception.

Roughly 96% of the energy content remains in the fuel after its first cycle. France and Russia already recycle this into MOX (mixed oxide) fuel.

Compare this to widely dumped industrial wastes like lead, arsenic, and mercury, which never decay and are toxic for eternity.

[Mike Tagliavia for State Rep @mtagvt]

@CMarkCoester Saw that.🤦

[Steve Skojec @SteveSkojec]

He’s dead on.

[Tironianae 🍊🍊 Z. - Ultra Verbum Vincet @Tironianae]

🚨 HOLY SMOKES. SCOTUS Justice Sam Alito asks ACLU lawyer "what is a man and a woman?" and they DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION.

Alito's response is perfect.

ALITO: What does it mean to be a man or woman?

ACLU: We do not have a definition for the Court.

ALITO: How can a court determine whether there's discrimination on the basis of s*x, without KNOWING what s*x means?!

Omg, you can't make this crap up. Seriously.

[TRIGGERnometry @triggerpod]

Helen Andrews On The Problem With the Feminization of Society

[Doug Sides @DougSides]

"Socialism is a political religion whose God is the State and whose priests are the bureaucrats... It is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal distribution of misery."

Winston Churchill

[ZUBY: @ZubyMusic]

The answers to many modern problems are simple but politically incorrect.

So instead of solving anything, everybody pretends they don't know what's going on, and spend years misdiagnosing the issue, talking in circles, and wasting time.

[The Rational Animal 🤔 @theobjectivist]

Shocking news!! The government spent $2.2 billion of your money on a solar plant that underperformed for 13 years, incinerated 6,000 birds annually, needed natural gas to start every morning, was made obsolete by cheaper technology within a decade, and now cannot be shut down because California regulators will not allow it. Shutting it down costs you. Keeping it open costs you. You lose either way. And somewhere, a politician is still calling this a win for clean energy. If you gave the government $2.2 billion to make toast, the bread would catch fire, the toaster would need gas to start, and they would make you keep buying toast you do not want for 13 more years.

Obama-backed $2.2B green energy 'boondoggle' leaves taxpayers on the hook https://t.co/98pZy3Rrla #FoxNews

[Peter Clack @PeterDClack]

The world will have to deal with 43 million tons of decommissioned wind turbine blades by Net Zero in 2050.

To put that in perspective, it’s the equivalent weight of 215,000 locomotives. These blades are made of high-strength composites designed to survive decades of brutal weather, and they are notoriously difficult to recycle. They were built to last, but they weren't built to disappear.

Every turbine standing today will likely be decommissioned and replaced at least once before 2050. Without a cost-effective way to recycle fibre-reinforced polymers, the majority of these massive blades are destined for eternity - buried forever in turbine graveyards.

China, Europe, and the US will account for the vast majority of this waste, creating a mountainous industrial heartache that many Net Zero models simply haven't priced in.

But 43 million tons of purely composite blade waste every 20 years is a colossal physical reality.

[New Yorkers for Affordability @NYAffordability]

70% of New Yorkers fear that green energy mandates will make their ‘unreasonable’ electricity bills even more expensive.

[The Rational Animal 🤔 @theobjectivist]

Everyone should unequivocally condemn the government-imposed racial discrimination Obama is pushing!

Obama makes three errors in one post, all of them philosophical.

First, the United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy. The purpose of the Constitution is to protect individual rights from the majority, not to ensure "equal participation in our democracy." The Founders designed the system specifically to prevent what Obama is demanding: unlimited majority rule.

Second, "protecting the rights of minority groups against majority overreach" sounds correct until you examine the premise. Rights belong to individuals, not groups. The moment you define rights by racial group membership, you have adopted the same collectivist framework that produced the discrimination you claim to oppose. Jim Crow categorized people by race and assigned rights accordingly. Modern voting rights activism does the same thing with different beneficiaries. Both are collectivism.

Third, gerrymandering is a problem created entirely by the system Obama wants to preserve: a political structure where the drawing of district lines determines outcomes. His solution is not to fix the structure. It is to ensure his side draws the lines.

The government must treat every citizen equally before the law. Everyone should reject Obama's framing entirely. He is not defending individual rights.

He is defending group power, while using the language of rights to make collectivism sound like liberty.