Katharine Hayhoe Caught Bearing False Witness – Yet Again

Screen-Shot-2015-11-08-at-2.29.36-PM2015-11-10-08-02-542015-11-10-08-03-13

A Canadian’s quest to use Scripture to help sell climate science

She says that 86% of Texas is currently in drought, but none of Texas is in drought, and they are having one of their wettest years on record.

YearPDeptUS (1)

YearPDeptUS.png (688×531)

pdi20151107-pg

pdi20151107-pg.gif (650×534)

Katharine is exposing herself as an extreme sociopath. What drives such sick behavior?

About stevengoddard

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

89 Responses to Katharine Hayhoe Caught Bearing False Witness – Yet Again

  1. Martin Smith says:

    You should fact check that story, Steven. Obviously, you didn’t. You also spelled her name wrong. Twice.

    • gator69 says:

      An you have yet to get our host’s name right even once!😆

      Talk about a fact check epic fail.

      At least Tony did not bear false witness.

    • wert says:

      “Not far into her presentation—after a slide displaying results from ancient ice core samples; before one showing 86 per cent of Texas currently languishing in drought—Katharine Hayhoe shifts from science to Scripture. ”

      I find this funny. Don’t you? If you want to say Texas has more floods and draught, you’d better present statistical evidence, not anecdotal evidence. I think stevengoddard.himself does enough anecdotal one.

    • Martin seems to be just about out of ammo,

      • Martin Smith says:

        You should live so long. You haven’t addressed any of the points I’ve raised. There have only been a few. You keep making the same glaring mistakes. It’s no wonder climate scientists don’t bother refuting you.

        • You aren’t making any points. Just noise.

        • Martin Smith says:

          Then why did you correct the spelling of her name?
          You really should fact check the report you quoted from. Well, you aren’t big on facts, I guess.

        • AndyG55 says:

          You have not made any points..are pointless. And always in error.
          Climate scientist have not refuted him because they know he is right.

          With do you think he can use the word FRAUD with immunity. Because they really, really cannot have the “discovery” that would be involved in a court case.

          We have seen how Mickeymouse Mann has fought discovery.

          We see how the fraudsters at Nasa/Giss are fighting discovery.

          They have a LOT to hide.

          Your continued comments here after being outed as a minor Al Gore operative, and thus having a total inability to post facts or accept facts is doing GREAT DAMAGE to the AGW cult.🙂

        • AndyG55 says:

          Her name is spelt correctly. And if it was wrong earlier, then a spelling error is the most you have ever produced against SG.

          Very pathetic, even for a Gore bot

        • To be fair, Martin Smith also produced Jesus.

      • AndyG55 says:

        And what he does attempt to fire is either blanks or jambs in the gun.

        So far he has present absolutely NOTHING of any consequence.

        Pretty pathetic, even for a Gore bot.

    • Trollsmith! Black Friday Deals! Two For One Special!

      Now you see him, now you don’t!

    • David A says:

      Your facts???

    • FOREMAN says:

      If the spelling of a name is your primary concern, then you must be a person of little to no substance. I’ll bet you shoot messengers also.

      Good work Mr. Goddard, keep it up.

  2. gator69 says:

    This just proves which religion takes precedence in the minds of leftists. Hayhoe is a Warmunist first, and a Christian when it is convenient.

  3. Steve Case says:

    What drives such sick behavior?

    Money, Power and Prestige.

  4. Drcrinum says:

    Hayhoe quote from the Gillis article:
    “How loving is it to ignore when developed countries do things that actively harm developing nations?” she asks, pausing to let the question sink in. “When people who have resources do things that harm people who do not, right here in our country?”

    This is really, really sick reasoning. The warmists wish to deny access to reliable energy supplies by developing countries, perpetuating poverty and misery. The warmists are the ones who wish to inflict harm on the poor and impoverished. If Hayhoe wishes to quote scripture, I suggest she start with: Matthew 7:5 — “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

    • gator69 says:

      Yes Hayhoe is indeed sick.

      Lomborg and I may disagree on what is driving contemporary climate change, and that is fine, because at least Lomborg has his priorities straight. I have the highest degree of respect for Bjorn, for great reason, even though we disagree on climate change.

  5. Alf says:

    Help me out here. I live in BC close to the Washington border. According to the Pamer drought index a good part do southern BC should be in some stage of drought. If this what they call drought I am God smacked. maybe that droughts respect international borders. maybe that Canada customs refused droughts entry to Canada.

  6. Latitude says:

    Says we are in moderate drought….it’s rained every day, standing water everywhere, mosquito planes are spraying every day..and the water table is about 18 inches below the surface
    Farmers are loosing crops from too much water..and the Everglades is draining water as fast as they can into the bay

    • Can you just imagine what it must be like in Lubbock right now??

      Lakeland, Fl. is listed as “mid-range”, but at my place, we’ve had mud and standing water all around us for many months now. If I walk out into my yard, places that are normally firm to walk on at this time of year are currently squishy and muddy. This state of affairs has been going on since approximately June. And while that’s not abnormal for my yard during summer, the norm is for it be over with by mid-October. But it still looks more like August in terms of soil moisture around here.

      It’s great for aquifer recharge, but … mid-range, it is not. I’d classify it as approximately the 93rd-plus percentile of wet conditions for this location and this time of year.

      BTW I have also lost a lot of garden yield this summer due to difficulty in keeping the soil sufficiently drained, and the loss has been much higher than normal for me. So it’s very aggravating to be told that these are normal soil conditions for me, when they so obviously aren’t.

    • Nobama says:

      Lat, from your experience, what is the best part of FL? I’m thinking of retiring over there in a low tax county. I’d like to be a little rural, on well, septic, and solar before the eco church takes over. Any advice?

      • Jason Calley says:

        Hey Nobama! As a Florida resident my best advice (and anyone with better info feel free to interject) would be to look somewhere around Mariana, Florida. Mariana is in the panhandle of Florida, so you still get a little chilly weather there. Don’t plan on growing a lot of citrus. On the other hand the winters are mild, there are a lot of creeks and streams in the area and it is still rural and agricultural for the most part. Mariana is big enough to have any normal services you might need and is only about an hours drive east of Tallahassee. It is also fairly close to the Gulf Coast if you want to see the beach. Check it out.

        • Nobama says:

          Very nice! One of the lowest tax counties in the state. And only an hour or so from Tallahassee or Panama Beach. High ground for that occasional hurricane. It does have some sinkhole activity though. Can’t have everything.

        • Jason Calley says:

          As a good caver, I see that sinkhole activity as a good thing. New caves! Cool!

        • gator69 says:

          As a fellow spelunker and diver, I must second this motion. There are many great caves/springs to explore. Just be careful in home placement.

        • Gail Combs says:

          So there are three of us cavers on the board. However I am not about to go cave diving. Once was enough and only to keep up the honor of us Yanks in front of the Pommies… At least Florida caves don’t feel like they have icebergs floating in them.

      • Latitude says:

        Nobama, depends. I’m a native extreme south Florida, so I can’t take cold at all. If you like the change of the seasons, Jason’s right. If you don’t want to deal with much cold, and want to grow tropicals, then south and East of the lake. Personally, I love the Big Bend area around Crystal River too. That’s low tax, inexpensive living, and the real old Florida.

        • Latitude says:

          Loxahatchee is still rural, but with everything you’d ever want within a short drive.
          It’s sorta a step up from extreme rural.

        • Nobama says:

          Great info. Thanks! I lived in Juno Beach for a year in 1999, so Loxahatchee would be familiar. Gotta love the amenities there. I agree on the Crystal River area also. I think I need several reconnaisance trips and a lot of lazy sunny drives to decide. If anything, there are too many good choices.

      • gator69 says:

        I am not a huge fan of Florida, but have lived there. My father was a seventh generation Floridian and my mother still lives near the original homestead settled nearly 175 years ago. If I were to choose an area it would be what Floridians call the “real Florida”, north central Florida. It is still small town, and has many beautiful springs and rivers as well as many other outdoorsy attractions. Basically north of Orlando and south of Lake City, east of Chiefland and west of Palatka.

        But it all depends on what you are looking for.

        • Nobama says:

          That’s actually one area I’ve looked at pretty closely. Levy and Gilchrist counties. Very rural and cheap, and some spots just 30 minutes from Gainesville. Set up a little homestead in Trenton, and a trailer on Horseshoe beach.

        • Gail Combs says:

          I think I would prefer the mountains of South Carolina if I was to resettle. Unfortunately the Yanks and Progressives have ‘found’ North Carolina.

        • gator69 says:

          Mountains of Montana would be my first choice, Alaska second.

        • NomoreGore says:

          I don’t know, Gator… kinda nippy. Beautiful though, no doubt. Maybe a summer cabin, then winter in FL.

        • gator69 says:

          For me, Winter is part of the attraction, which is why I am no huge fan of Florida. I prefer white mountains to white beaches.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Yeah, we supposedly are ‘normal’ Today is the first day I have seen the sun in WEEKS. It finally quit raining this afternoon.

  7. Andy DC says:

    Liberals hate any mention of Christ in the public square, unless he is embraced by one of their own. Then, all of a sudden, he isn’t quite so terrible.

    • Martin Smith says:

      Actually, Jesus was a liberal.

      • dave1billion says:

        Umm, you just made Andy’s point for him.

        Are you TRYING to put all of us card carrying minions out of work?

        • Martin Smith says:

          Liberals don’t “hate any mention of Christ in the public square,” because Jesus was a liberal. Jesus was a leftist. If liberals hate anything about Jesus, it’s the people who claim to be Christian who clearly aren’t like Jesus at all.

        • Martin Smith stepped into the light, realized he was like Jesus.

      • This is getting a bit confused. What I think Andy is driving at (he certainly can correct me if I’m wrong) is that Leftists, if they mention Christ at all, preach a different Christ than that the one found in Scripture. Thus by implication, they preach a false Christ, and they are false evangelists.

        People of various political stripes stumble when dealing with the concept of charity. Charity exists among conservatives, revisionists, leftists, libertarians (all right, maybe less so the last group, but still a little.) But originally, it was a conservative concept. After all, conservatism was the original doctrine, was it not? Is that not kind-of true by definition? So unless one believes (blasphemously, I might point out) that the original doctrine of God excluded charity, then charity is a conservative doctrine, which has been coopted by anti-Christians for their own ends — just as they try to co-opt Christ for their own ends. But these are lies, and unrepentant liars have their reward.

        Is it true that many conservatives today have abandoned charity? YES!! It is! But THAT doesn’t make Christ a liberal! This is apples and oranges.

        Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. What that means is really not hard to understand. The fact that so many stumble over its meaning is a testament to their own mind, not to the supposed difficulty of the teaching. In a nutshell, the old law was imperfect, and in The New Covenant, some changes are made and the relationship with God perfected. That’s not overthrowing the old, nor is it contradicting the old. It is simply showing how some parts of what was given were not the ideal, but were given because the hard-heartedness of the recipients prevented them from having the perfect version at that time.

        Bottom line, a liberal is someone who seeks to overturn or throw out established rules. Christ made some changes, which is his right, but the old rules, which lead to death, still apply to those who reject him, and the new rules are, in many respects, as hard or harder to follow! The only material difference is that they no longer lead to death. But the Scripture (which is the same as Christ himself) is entirely consistent from beginning to end. No part of it overthrows another part. There are differences for different times, but that doesn’t mean that one part is right and another is wrong. Each portion is right for its time. So there is no way that it (or he) can be properly seen as liberal. He is loving and forgiving of those who accept him by the last day of this age. But there’s nothing un-conservative or anti-conservative about that. “Liberal” essentially means saying “I’m in charge”, or “We’re in charge, I and my friends here on Earth.” This is inherently, by definition, Antichrist. For those who believe in that doctrine, but blithely carry on preaching the lordship of Jesus and preaching his Kingdom, and present their own kingdom they’ve set up, with their own rules (or lack thereof) as if it’s the authentic Kingdom of God which Jesus offered to people, this is powerful blasphemy, and greater damnation awaits them. “He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity”.

        Fortunately, there’s no need to fall for such traps, because we have the preserved Scripture to guide us away from them. Many of the liberals, of course, don’t want us reading that, because in their teachings they have massively and fraudulently changed it.

        • Gail Combs says:

          ‘ Libertarians ‘ or classic liberals have zero problem with charity. They have a problem with ‘Charity at Gunpoint’ Where a liberal steals the money from everyone else bashes the others as stingy, takes a cut of the money and then bathes in the praise of being so ‘generous’.

        • That’s your opinion, but it is decidedly not my experience.

        • By the way, there is a difference between a libertarian and a classical liberal. That’s why they have the two terms; they mean different things.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Richard,

          I am well aware they are different. and neither have a problem with private charity. That does not mean they are charitable it means they will not prevent others from giving or receiving charity. Charity should be completely up to the individual.

          As far as I am concerned charity belongs with churches or other private organizations. It does not belong in the hands of a government. At least that way we can keep a close eye out for corruption and waste.

        • Where this started was when I said charity “exists” “less so” among libertarians, and that is an absolute fact. I’ve tangled with many libertarians (and even some conservatives) who despise charity, and also a few like yourself who believe in it.

          I argue that there’s nothing wrong with a temporal government engaging in charity within reason, if it can afford it and if the constituents approve of it. But it’s a problem if it’s funded by borrowing, or by excessive and involuntary taxation.

          Traditionally, all charity including education was handled by churches and, later, by other private interests. However, we’re increasingly seeing “churches” that refuse assistance to non-members, even as (in many cases) they spend exorbitantly on themselves, and many of the non-church charities are hurting for money. While it pains me to have to say it, we have a lot of poor people today who would be in extremis or dead without temporal public charity. I … can … not tell you, Gail, how many times, I have seen otherwise good Christians sneer at others over the issue of charity, and they usually cite libertarian values (i.e. I/we don’t have to, and you/they don’t deserve it) in their defense. This is, frankly, Anti-Christ. They have the right to their position, but they are wrong to call this a Christian or a biblical attitude. They will have a lot to answer for, if they don’t shape up.

          And then on the other hand, there are a large number of false churches teaching deadly doctrine, but giving out lots of charity to the general public. I won’t name any names here, but they’re certainly out there. That is arguably the worse of the two problems.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Richard,
          I have mentioned before I am Agnostic and Hubby an Atheist but we do believe in the morals and ethics of Christianity. This is something some Christians have a heck of a time wrapping their minds around. However it is quite simple. As a civilization, to be viable, we have to have a common code of ethics and of conduct. For the USA that is the Christian code, a code that has proved excellent over time. By not accepting that we end up with the mess we are now seeing.

          Richard D. Lamm was correct:

          I have a secret plan to destroy America…. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think…. no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures.
          http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1663652/posts

          I think the hypocrisy you see now is BECAUSE the government has taken over the charitable role from the Church. Many people now think, I pay taxes and some of that money goes to the needy so I have ‘done my duty’ not understanding ALL of the tax revenue now goes to pay the interest on the US debt. BTW it is the Democrats who are the stingiest.

          Also Charity is not just giving money it is also deeds and there is where Americans beat all other nations hands down. link

          BTW ” Jesus was a liberal.” Seems to be the newest sound bite for messing with the heads of conservatives out of the progressives.

          Actually ” Jesus was a CLASSIC liberal, as were the Founding Fathers.” {:>D

        • gator69 says:

          Hey GaIl! I get it. One of my favorite “infidels” explains how he finds morality without religion…

          And as an added bonus…

        • AndyG55 says:

          Not sure if I’m agnostic .. never really considered the issue. It is unimportant to me.

          But I do understand and appreciate Gail’s point.

          We live in a society based on Christian beliefs, ethics etc etc, and for the most part that society works well….. until we get people who don’t follow that system or want to change that system.

        • AndyG55 says:

          “no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two COMPETING languages and cultures.…”

          And that, in a nutshell, is the problem with Islam.

          In most western countries, none of the other religions “compete” as such….

          …. they all try to “get along together”

          Islam competes with all, and has absolutely no intention of “getting along” with others.

      • David A says:

        How so? You keep making assertions that are clearly wrong. Everything Christ stated was a recommendation for YOU to chose to do something, not for you to choose for SOMEONE else to do something.

        Others are letting you know that a classic liberal is not a progressive.

      • darwin says:

        Yes Martin, you’re right. Jesus was a leftist.

        I was just reading the bible the other day and recall fondly His demands that the Roman government provide free health care to the citizens of Rome. Plus, who could forget His sermon demanding the Rome raise taxes on business and the “evil rich”?

        His sermon where He chastises “capitalism” and demands tougher laws on “hate speech” rocked.

        My favorite though is when He blames the climate on the meat eaters. Man, no leftist today can give a speech like that!

      • FOREMAN says:

        Actually, Jesus Was The Only Begotten Son Of God, The Creator Of The Universe. The Wind And Waves Obeyed Him. He Created Food To Feed 5,000 Men(Not Counting Women And Children) From 5 Loves And 2 Fished, And Had 12 Baskets Left Over For His Disciples. He Created Food To Feed 4,000 Men(Not Counting Women And Children) From 7 Loaves, And Had 7 Baskets Left Over. He Healed The Sick And Raised The Dead. Martin, If He’s A Liberal, Why Aren’t “Liberals” Embracing Him And Obeying His Commandments?
        Jhn 14:15
        ¶ If ye love Me, keep My commandments.
        NOT A SUGGESTION, IT’S A COMMAND! NO MARTIN, JESUS IS NOT A LIBERAL.

      • ricks2014 says:

        Yes, absolutely, Jesus was a Liberal !

        I remember that one time where Jesus was the “Grand Marshal” of the first Gay Pride Parade, I think it was in Bethlehem ?

        Seeing the Lord celebrating homosexuality was amazing ?

        Then that one time the Lord was defending the 1st Abortion Clinic, I remember Him saying, “How is it that my Father in Heaven decides alone about Human Life, after all isn’t it the Women’s Right do decide who lives and who dies, for their own sake” ?

        Then that other time when Jesus was handing out free Pornography (To those above the age of “18”!) on the corner because they had the “Right” (Freedom of Speech!) to view such entertaining pictures and videos ?

        How about the time the Lord “reversed” what He said about “Giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s” ! He was right to do so because of tremendous poverty, the People’s money it theirs and theirs alone, Caesar already is too “Rich”, redistribute wealth to the under privileged ?

        Then that other time when Jesus reversed His previous statement about paying what was promised to worker’s who had worked different hours, “The same pay for all, who cares how many hours they worked” Same Pay for All !

        And to think that the Lord considered “All” Religions equal stating that the “road” to Heaven is “wide” and everyone is on it, especially the “Atheists” ?

        And to think that Jesus was the “1st” advocate towards Global Climate Change, the Lord when’t so as far as to recant His previous statement that “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away” by saying that just because He created the Heavens and the Earth it doesn’t mean that He can save it from Mankind ?

        And to think, Jesus was the “1st” Marxist ?

        Go figure, I would never have known ?

        But “everyone” remembers when the Lord said, “Power to the People” and “World Workers Unite”

        “He” then said that everyone will be equal in Heaven despite their inequities, what a Guy !!

        Then that one time the Lord said that “He” was “wrong” in His treatment of Lucifer saying that “Lucifer should have been given more and that it was the “Lord’s” fault in Satan’s fall, that Jesus should have been more compassionate towards Lucifer’s feelings ???

        Yes, it’s “True” Jesus was a “Liberal” and the World is a better place because of His Liberal, Socialist, Communist, Marxist brothers, sisters and transgenders…

        ????????????????????????????????????????????

  8. OrganicFool says:

    3 billion living in extreme poverty without much or any access to electricity, clean and running water, hygienic conditions, ability to heat and cool their homes, cook food except by dung or wood, some kind of decent education, healthcare standards, good nutrition?

    Justice for the poor is one of the major themes of the scriptures. False piety is condemned. “Woe to the (Climate?) Pharisees”.

    Christ’s opening scripture quote (Luke 4, when they tried to throw him off a cliff in his hometown of Nazareth): “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” (Isaiah 61)

    There is a moral case for fossil fuels: http://www.moralcaseforfossilfuels.com

    • gofer says:

      They want to keep people poor:

      The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another
      United States. We can’t let other countries have the same
      number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US.
      We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”
      – Michael Oppenheimer,
      Environmental Defense Fund

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      “Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty,
      reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
      – Professor Maurice King

      http://www.green-agenda.com

    • Barbara says:

      Thank you, O.F. You are not a fool, surely, just careful with your diet? Thanks for posting the link to “moral case for fossil fuels”. The book of that name by Alex Epstein is excellent. Highly recommended for all the readers and those posting here.

    • FOREMAN says:

      Excellent Points Organic. Here’s Something To Think About. All Those Who Promote “Man-Made Global Warming/Climate Change” !Hate Trees!. As A Matter Of Fact They !Hate Everything That Is Green!. They Also !Hate Whales!, And Rigorously Promote !World Hunger!. Ironic, Isn’t It.

  9. gofer says:

    Spirit of fear epitomizes agw zealots with all the catastrophic musings. The whole premise is built on fear.

  10. Alf says:

    Jesus was first a non materialist and secondly a nihilist (from an evolutionary perspective). There was no reason to propagate or “lay up treasures on earth” because his second coming was imminent. If early Christians would have fallowed his advice, Christianity would have die out in it’s first generation of existence. He told his followers that “this generation will not pass away” until he comes again. in all; a collective form of nihilism and possibly the seed of present day nihilist tendencies.

    • No Alf, it’s lay not up for yourself treasures upon Earth. That completely changes the meaning.

      And even if it said what you say, laying up means storing, which implies we’re talking about ‘in excess of your own immediate need’.

      Do you know the parable of the rich fool? You can find it in Luke 12.

      And the generation he refers to is the period of the Church age. Generations are measured by the life of kings. The generation of Iesous can be very long, because he doesn’t die. It’s all simple and makes perfect sense, if you want it to.

      See also Luke 12:24 — “Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feeds them: how much more are you better than the fowls?”

      As for him being a non-materialist, well yes, but he is also a materialist when he needs to be. So that’s all well and good.

    • FOREMAN says:

      Question: “What Did Jesus Mean When He Said, “This Generation Will Not Pass”?”

      Answer: This Quote Of Jesus In Regards To The End Times Is Found In Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; And Luke 21:32. Jesus Said, “Truly I Say To You, This Generation Will Not Pass Away Until All These Things Take Place.” The Key To Understanding What Jesus Means Is The Context; That Is, We Must Understand The Verses That Are Surrounding Verse 34, But Especially The Verses Prior To It. In Matthew 24:4-31, Jesus Is Speaking Of Future Events. The Generation Of People Living When Those Events Occur Is The Generation That Jesus Speaks Of “Not Passing” Until He Returns. Jesus Had Already Told Those Living During His Earthly Ministry That The Kingdom Had Been Taken From Them (Matthew 21:43). Therefore, It Is Imperative That Matthew 24-25 Be Seen As Speaking Of A Future Time. The Word “Generation” Refers To The People Alive In The Future When The Events Of Matthew 24-25 Will Occur.

      Essentially, Jesus Is Saying That, Once The Events Of The End Times Begin, They Will Happen Quickly. This Concept Is Echoed In Many Other Scriptures (Matthew 24:22; Mark 13:20; Revelation 3:11; 22:7,12,20).
      Hope This Helps Mr. Alf…………….

      • FOREMAN,

        Thank you for your contributions.

        May I ask if you disagree with my interpretation? Your words, in my view, are not entirely clear about this. That we are both correct, and that our interpretations are not mutually exclusive, is clear to me. Is it to you?

        Also, you say that it is imperative that Matthew 24-25 be seen as speaking of a future time. It is not obvious, from a plain reading of my comment, that I do so?

        Thank you again for expanding upon my answers.

        –RT

        • FOREMAN says:

          Richard, Thank You For You Kind Words Of Greeting. To Be Honest, I Hadn’t Really Read Your Total Post Until You Brought It To My Attention. Yes, I Believe We Are Both Saying That Mt.24:34 Is Talking About The Last Generation When The Events Mention Will Occur. Notice That In Mt.23:36, That Jesus Was Talking About The Physical Generation Of Which He Was Part, And The Prophecy Was Specific To The Jews Of That Generation. I Do Like Vs 39; Baruch Haba B’shem Adonai::

          Grace & Peace To You And Yours Richard.

        • FOREMAN says:



          For Some Reason This Site Didn’t Post With My 1st Post. Hope You Enjoy It.

        • FOREMAN says:

          Still Didn’t Come Through, Sorry

        • FOREMAN says:

          Try It Once More

  11. eliza says:

    I must we should thank Mr Schmit for bringing so much trafico here LOL. Please keep him!!!! don’t ever ban him! LOL

    • AndyG55 says:

      Also his idiocy truly highlights the moronic desperation of the Gore camp.

      They know that Arctic sea ice is now on the rise.

      They know that only way they can keep going is by LYING through their teeth about basically everything to do with the climate.

      Yet they send a low-information operative like Martin the Gore bot. Persistently wrong.

      Pretty pathetic to say the least. But probably the best they can manage.

  12. eliza says:

    I must say…

  13. ricks2014 says:

    Come on Katherine “Hey-Hoe”, sing along…

    Hey Satan, paid my dues, workin as a climate liar

    Hey Momma, look at Me, I’m on my way to the promised land…

    Wow, I’m on a Highway to Hell, Highway to Hell..

    And Her friends are gonna be there too !

    !!!

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