Science Has Returned To The Dark Ages Under Barack Obama

Barack Obama says that shrinking glaciers are proof of global warming, and that he can stop glaciers from shrinking by making US electricity prices skyrocket.

2015-10-23-06-20-00Obama: Shrinking Exit Glacier a powerful sign of warming climate | Reuters

According to the National Park Service, the particular glacier he was looking at was receding faster 100 years ago during NOAA’s coldest years ever.

multigraph

ScreenHunter_2934 Sep. 06 12.40

ScreenHunter_2831 Sep. 01 18.11

www.nps.gov/kefj/learn/nature/upload/The Retreat of Exit Glacier.pdf

The 1899 Harriman expedition found that almost all Alaskan glaciers were retreating, and that they had receded greatly in the past (when CO2 was at pre-industrial levels.)

2015-10-23-07-02-472015-10-23-07-03-012015-10-23-07-01-232015-10-23-07-02-14

www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/197245.pdf?acceptTC=true

It wasn’t just Alaska. All Swiss glaciers were also retreating during NOAA’s coldest years ever.

2015-10-23-06-05-5311 Feb 1915, Page 3

Glaciers in South America and Africa were also receding

2015-10-23-06-49-02

7 Dec 1903, Page 5 – at Newspapers.com

Obama’s energy policy is not based on science or rational thought, but scientists who disagree with him get prosecuted.

2015-10-23-06-34-13

LetterPresidentAG

Barack Obama has brought science and government backwards by 500 years, and violated the most sacred principles our country was founded on.

galileo (1)

pope-obama1

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Science Has Returned To The Dark Ages Under Barack Obama

  1. Marsh says:

    When Barack Obama was first elected , I thought he would be a President for positive change. Unfortunately, it’s poles apart ; its nearly all been negative & regressive for the Country. He would have to be amongst the three Worst Presidents , the USA has ever had !

    • kentclizbe says:

      Marsh,

      “When Barack Obama was first elected , I thought he would be a President for positive change. ”

      Welcome to the real world. Many Americans, based on clear evidence of his belief system, and his past, knew exactly what kind of president Obama would be.

      A couple questions:

      First, with your initial assessment of Obama, were you really “thinking” or were you actually “feeling?”

      And second, what woke you up to the reality of Obama’s hatred for our country?

      Interesting sociological study….

      • Marsh says:

        kentclizbe : Good point on Sociology. Feeling was a factor or a wished for something
        new & better “but” it was like buying a “new car” that turned out to be a lemon. The problems were apparent the moment the clunker left the showroom floor ; he should have been replaced under warranty…
        ………
        What woke me up to his hatred for the USA ?
        Obama has a “serial tendency” to do the opposite of what is right & best for the US.
        ……….
        Seriously, Obama is Not placing the US first in his mindset, it appears his passion is
        more for the product of power than for it’s people. He is a man of hidden agendas and
        is undermining the Country with unusual impunity ; not unlike a false messiah. This is more complex than just megalomania, as there are psychopath traits in his pursuits.
        ……….
        Remember how Ronald Reagan loved his Country with a passion. Not everyone agreed with his politics,, but they trusted the man and knew his intentions were honorable ;
        I just don’t see those qualities in Barack Obama.

        • kentclizbe says:

          Marsh,

          Thanks very much for your insightful examination of Obama.

          I guess what is the most interesting to me is: How/Why did you NOT see Obama’s qualities during the 2008 election?

          All of the points you make were clearly illuminated by many analysts and commentators, throughout the 2007-2008 run-up to Obama’s coronation?

          What is it that allowed the scales to drop from your eyes?

          And why were the scales on your eyes in 2007-2008?

          Not a personal indictment against you, just interested in exploring the sociological and human behavioral issues that result in disasters like Obama in a democratic republic.

          Thanks.

        • Marsh says:

          kentclizbe : I never voted for Obama… you are jumping to conclusions as I never contributed to the disaster, ( honestly ) ! When elected, I thought he “maybe” OK, there is a saying: we don’t always get what we choose,,, but have to make the most of what we get… sadly…
          ………

        • kentclizbe says:

          Marsh,

          Sorry, but there’s no jumping to conclusions here. Never suggested you voted for him.

          Just quoted you: ““When Barack Obama was first elected , I thought he would be a President for positive change. ”

          And asked why/how you could have possible thought/felt like that?

          Nothing about your voting record:

          “I guess what is the most interesting to me is: How/Why did you NOT see Obama’s qualities during the 2008 election?

          “All of the points you make were clearly illuminated by many analysts and commentators, throughout the 2007-2008 run-up to Obama’s coronation?”

          The 2008 election was a time of massive vetting and exposure of Obama’s background. The question is, were you just not paying attention then? Or if you were, and were informed about his background, why were you surprised that he is acting in full conformity with his background?

          Thanks.

        • Marsh says:

          kentclizbe ; Yes, it’s a good point you make in that much of Society did not fully take in the downside of the person. I was heavily caught up with a major project and since I wasn’t going to vote for Obama,,, I probably switched off on all that negative stuff. In his first term , I was surprised by the extent of his damage, holding back the economy and introducing an ideology unfit for a democratic Nation. More surprisingly, he has gotten away with it and become worse in the process. In most other democratic Countries, “his type” would have been booted out long ago , by a vote of no confidence.
          ………
          The Media is partly to blame as so much is hyped up and blown out of proportion much like AGW . Most have reached a stage of “too much Saturation” and it’s become so difficult separating the BS from the truth. People no longer trust the Media & very often
          less & less is treated seriously ; including criticism of Obama prior to Election.
          ……….
          Not saying it’s the only reason, but it has to be a key factor for the election outcome.
          Also , most of the public wanted a change & remember that Obama drew upon racial
          sides ; they perhaps thought he would do more justice for them,,, but to no avail !
          ……….
          No doubt , others more Qualified than me , have all the reasons and as you know ;
          the weak links need to be addressed and not just written about,,, thanks, I do agree with you in principle.

  2. cfgjd says:

    Why don’t you post Alaska temperatures instead of global ones, which are not relevant?

  3. That’s an outrageous slur on the dark ages!

    • rebelronin says:

      interesting that in the Dark and Middle Ages
      leadership suffered the consequences of their failures immediately
      very often leading from the front in battle
      Barrack Obama will walk away untouched
      to untold millions of dollars
      and denying the wreckage he walks away from

  4. DD More says:

    You wrote: Barack Obama has brought science and government backwards by 500 years, and violated the most sacred principles our country was founded on.

    He is just following the religion of his Father, Mother, Step-Father and their other wives.

    There are roughly 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, but only two scientists from Muslim countries have won Nobel Prizes in science (one for physics in 1979, the other for chemistry in 1999). Forty-six Muslim countries combined contribute just 1 percent of the world’s scientific literature; Spain and India each contribute more of the world’s scientific literature than those countries taken together.
    http://www.fasebj.org/content/20/10/1581.full

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s