Hot Weather Is A Thing Of The Past In New York

New York used to have a lot of hot days prior to 1960, but it rarely happens any more.

2015-12-27-00-37-19

The frequency of cold nights hasn’t changed, but this year was by far the coldest on record – with more than one night out of twelve below zero F.

2015-12-27-06-24-58

January through March was the coldest on record in New York this year.

2015-12-27-06-48-44

New York governor Mario Cuomo is working hard to protect the state from overheating, a problem which exists only in his mind.

About stevengoddard

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

62 Responses to Hot Weather Is A Thing Of The Past In New York

  1. gator69 says:

    Progressives have many problems that exist in their minds, it is basically what makes them progressives.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Progressives only exist in their own minds.
      The Philosophy Of Karl Marx

      … As a student, Marx accepted the philosophy of Hegel as the only sound and adequate explanation of the universe…

      Thus, Hegel accepted as real only that which existed in the mind. Objective phenomena and events were of no consequence; only the conceptions of them possessed by human minds were real. Ideas, not objects, were the stuff of which the universe was made. The universe and all events therein existed and took place only in the mind, and any change was a change in ideas….

      It is a philosophy that can only exist in a pampered and protected society. They KNOW this and thus the wrapping of kiddies in cotton batting to protect them from the reality.

      Here in NC the nursery schools are now promoting yelling at a kid as ‘abuse’
      Study: Yelling At Kids Comparable To Physical Punishment From The People’s Republic of Taxachusetts of course. Home of the World’s Foremost Marxist Scholars.

      We have been banned from one preschool for speaking sharply to a misbehaving animal that was about to harm a child.

  2. HenryP says:

    It must be because of global warming? / ironic on

  3. Henry P says:

    it must be global warming that caused it?/
    irony on

  4. Henry P says:

    mind you
    JFK shows warming for the past 40 years or so
    it might be because of all the planes landing and departing…

  5. Gail Combs says:

    I was in Westchester just above NYC from 1959 to 1965 and it was DARN HOT! As in 100F. It has been cooler here in mid NC the last few summers than it was in Westchester. We barely saw a few days over 90F and none reaching 100F.

  6. Henry P says:

    @Morgan Wright

    Hi Morgan. It was only in the beginning of the seventies that most weather stations were issued with computers that were connected to recorders with thermo couples, that automatically recorded an average temperature for the day. I don’t know really where is the sense of comparing those values with other values before that time, especially before the 1950’s
    [where the earliest re-calibration certificate I could find of any thermometer is 1948….]
    You would be comparing cherries with raisins?

    Anyway, even with JFK included as one of my random samples of 54 stations, and probably contrary to what anyone else is telling you, I find that [in total] the earth is now cooling, whether you look at maxima, means or minima,

    • Henry P says:

      Note to the above graph:
      amt of sampled stations NH= amt of stations SH and total must balance to zero latitude.
      Longitude does not matter as long as you look at K/annum. You know why?

    • skeohane says:

      I believe you meant the late 80s for the computer/thermocouple set-ups, ‘MMTS’ is what I recall them being called.

      • Henry P says:

        Gee
        I hope not. I thought we started getting computerized earlier.
        If so, this must be reason why I get higher correlation with my graphs if I turn my attention on maxima and minima: nothing much that can go wrong with reading a thermometer that gets stuck on the minimum and maximum for the day, as long as there is somebody around who actually performs the task of reading that thermometer every day…

  7. au1corsair says:

    New York governor Mario Cuomo has reason to feel hot. He’s hot under the collar over the failure of his total gun ban proposals.

    I wonder what the population control measure of disarmament has to do with Global Warming? Why do Global Warming fanatics count themselves in the ranks of the “sensible total gun ban” control freaks?

    • gator69 says:

      Why do Global Warming fanatics count themselves in the ranks of the “sensible total gun ban” control freaks?

      You just answered your own question. It was never about guns or climate, it has always been about control.

    • Henry P says:

      I am not in favor of guns in my house.
      It is the stats that show you are most vulnerable in a house with guns.
      I saw a family member and a dear friend both kill themselves with a gun after marriage problems and health issues respectively. 1) How easy it would have been to find a new partner. 2) what a coward way to cop out of life just because you cannot do mountain climbing anymore.

      I am sure they could have lived happily for many years – if they had only accepted the changed circumstances of their lives. But they just had one moment of severe depression and had “armed” themselves with a gun.

      There are other ways to kill yourself of course, but they are not so successful as finding a gun in the house….

      • Gail Combs says:

        It should still be a personal choice.

        We come from the point of view that an unarmed populus is very vulnerable to a totalitarian dictator.

        DEMOCIDE: Death by Government
        Stripping civilians of their ability to defend themselves is usually the first step and a multiple killing is usually the excuse. Look at the countries that have disarmed their citizens: Turkey – 1911, Soviet Union – 1929, Germany – 1938, China – 1935, Guatemala – 1964, Uganda – 1970.

        • Henry P says:

          It appears that if we only live our lives for this life, to “protect” ourselves, we will lose it.
          I have elaborated on that in chapter 16 of my book
          http://www.hourofpower.org/global/south_africa/news/JesusisGodbook.doc

        • Henry, I did not see Gail advocate anywhere to live our lives only to protect ourselves. As a matter of fact, she frequently speaks of having taken actions in service to others that had severe personal consequences for her.

        • Henry P says:

          Gail knows I respect her beliefs just as I expect her to respect and recognize my beliefs.
          I am not condemning those who keep weapons in their house. However, I am asking:
          Do you place your trust in God or do you trust your gun more?
          I remember in one of the most popular soapies: “Rich man, poor man” there was a scene where
          the weapon manufacturers sat around a table, deciding that Cuba would be a nice place to start a war. Since then we had,
          Korea
          Vietnam
          Afghanistan
          Iracq
          Afghanistan again
          IS (Syria/Iracq)

          where we know that the weapon manufacturers were supplying both sides and they were/are having a field day. In fact, weapon manufacturing is still the largest of all industries.
          Thinking back now, on the examples given, where many US soldiers lost their lives,
          Don’t you ask yourself: for what? was it worth it?

          Better to say: Those who make the guns and those who use them are both wrong,
          which is what Jesus wants us to do,
          which is my belief.

        • Gail Combs says:

          HenryP,
          I respect your choice, however even Jesus did not lay down and become a doormat nor did he tell us to do so.

          Matthew 21:12, 13

          And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves. 13And He said to them, “It is written, ‘MY HOUSE SHALL BE CALLED A HOUSE OF PRAYER’; but you are making it a ROBBERS’ DEN.”

          Also

          Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own; 20 for ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body. (1Co 6:19-20 ASV)

          Psalm 82:4 Rescue the weak and needy; Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked

          Ezekiel 33 “… 6 ‘But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and a sword comes and takes a person from them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require from the watchman’s hand.’

          (From http://www.biblicalselfdefense.com/ )

          So it is our duty to warn others (whether we are Christians or just civilized humans) and that is what I try to do.

          Personally I hate guns but I view them as the tool that allowed us to get out from under the Thug on Horseback.

      • I saw a family member and a dear friend both kill themselves … what a coward way to cop out …

        Henry, I think I understand how it affected you. I’ve lost people I loved to suicide and I took it hard every time. I still mourn them but I have resolved long ago to not judge them. I do not know how much they suffered and I’m thankful for the life and resilience I was gifted. I know I’ve been extremely fortunate with family upbringing, good health and other life circumstances but I do not take anything for granted. I expect to be tried as I age and I will continue to pray to God to give me the strength to go on.

        There are other ways to kill yourself of course, but they are not so successful as finding a gun in the house …

        They are. You may have heard about high suicide rates in Central and Eastern European Communist countries with strict gun control. The preferred suicide methods were hanging, natural gas, rat poison, jumping from windows and drowning. The unavailability of guns didn’t stop people from killing themselves. A piece of rope and a chair were available in every farm house. Natural gas was there for most city apartment dwellers, frequently with deadly explosions killing everyone else around them. It was not these objects that made people do it—the general despair of everyday life and a lack of faith were the culprit.

        ——————–
        Methods of suicide: international suicide patterns derived from the WHO mortality database
        http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/9/07-043489/en

        • Henry P says:

          Sorry, Colorado
          I have explained my belief
          [apparently our comments crossed]
          https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/12/27/hot-weather-is-a-thing-of-the-past-in-new-york/#comment-561619
          and that is what it is: A personal belief, which you cannot change or challenge. It is between God and me.
          But do go into any hospital and query the amount of failed suicides. Compare that with the amount of successful suicides. And then check the methods used.
          I honestly don’t know what results you might get/ but I have my suspicions
          let me know.

        • Sorry, Henry:

          Yes, I was writing a response while you have already posted your next comment but I do not see why it matters. My points stand and you did not address them. The non-firearms suicides I mention in my post above were very “successful”. The WHO statistics is not from the Cold War but it documents the same reality. People use what they have and too many do so “successfully”. Sending me to do research in hospitals and report back to you when you honestly don’t know what one may learn there is a silly evasion. You can do it yourself if you are so inclined but I suggest you start by reading the statistics and thinking about the subject. I would also appreciate if you told me about any specific rebuttal you may have to what I wrote earlier.

          Second, you say I cannot change or challenge your personal belief. I respect your beliefs and your faith. I agree—it is only between God and you. I didn’t try to change it but I don’t understand how you come to the conclusion I’m not allowed to challenge it. Christians should expect being tried, and not necessarily by me. You brought your faith into this discussion and that is your right. You have the right to not defend your factually wrong statements. You have the right to not explain how your belief applies in specific situations. You have all these rights except one: You can’t tell me what I can or cannot challenge.

          I’m sure you know there were horrific wars before you saw those fictional soap opera firearms makers deciding on a war in Cuba. I am also sure you know that people were waging wars since the dawn of time with whatever implements they had. These objects do not come to life and make us kill each other. Blaming others for our own violence and stupidity is a cop out to me. In 1914, the people of Europe cheered and marched enthusiastically into the trench warfare slaughter of the Great War. It was not the manufacturers who made them do it.

          I respect everyone’s right to not defend his life and lay it down meekly while being murdered. I even think I have met over the decades a few people who may actually do it even though I believe such individuals are extremely rare. It is much easier to say it than to do so. But our own lives notwithstanding, the question that most serious pacifists including Christians had trouble answering was not about sacrificing their own life. It was this:

          What would you do in a situation when a defenseless stranger is being murdered and there was a loaded gun on the ground? Would you pick it up? Would you use it to stop the killer? Would you use it at as a threat to stop the assault? Would you use non-lethal but violent methods to prevent the murder? Would you try to talk the killer out of it? What would you do if he was not agreeable? Would you do anything?

          Let me know. I really care what you think.

          I pray that I’d have the courage to not stand by passively even if I had to risk my own life.

        • Errata: Would you use it at as a threat …

        • Jason Calley says:

          Luke 22:36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

          Shooting, bad; hacking and stabbing, good.

          Of course the above is a bit tongue in cheek. I only wished to point out that the line between self defense and turning the other cheek is complicated. If I could ask Jesus just one question, it might very well be to get a clearer explanation about that subject.

        • Ted says:

          Henry-

          I don’t know the statistics in SA. But here in the US, there’s a much bigger difference between failed suicide attempts, and successful suicides. Women here are four times as likely to attempt suicide than men. Yet men actually kill themselves 3 times as often as women. So comparing attempts to completions is basically comparing men to women. The reasons for the differences certainly include choice of method, but there are psychological reasons behind that choice. The obvious inference from that 12:1 difference in success rate is that the men genuinely want to die, while the women’s motives are different. Putting a gun to your temple and pulling the trigger is NEVER a cry for help. Slitting wrists commonly is. I’ve known at least two women who did that regularly, just to test people. Bottom line is, I’ve known MANY women who threatened, or even attempted, suicide. I’ve never heard a man talk about it first. They just do it. It’s a totally different mentality, and it leads to choosing a fool proof method. Here in the US, guns are just the most convenient of those methods. But there are plenty of others.

      • Robertv says:

        God did not stop them !

  8. Andy DC says:

    It did go from warmest to coldest in only 2 years. Extreme weather and global weirding at its finest, though I can’t prove it. More likely a quirk, or perhaps the start of an Ice Age.

  9. au1corsair says:

    If you believe in Global Warming, you have to accept that suicide is for the good of Planet Earth. The only problem, according to the Global Warming mob, is that too much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere by human activities. Seven billion successful suicides today would solve that problem of excess human-released carbon dioxide.

    The choice is simple: climate denier or promoting genocide.

      • au1corsair says:

        Henry P is correct: that is gross. It is also truth.

        • Gail Combs says:

          “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner, founder of CNN and the UN Foundation

          KILLING THOSE “UNFIT TO LIVE” – George Bernard Shaw, Fabian Society co-founder

          “The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions. If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way. Is it any wonder that some of us are driven to prescribe the lethal chamber as the solution for the hard cases which are at present made the excuse for dragging all the other cases down to their level, and the only solution that will create a sense of full social responsibility in modern populations?”

          Source: George Bernard Shaw, Prefaces (London: Constable and Co., 1934), p. 296.

          “Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.”

          George Bernard Shaw: The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928, pg. 470)

          The same ideas are written by Obama’s Science Czar.

          “The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being,”

          Source: John Holdren, Paul and Anne Ehrlich: Population Limitation 1973, pg 235

          Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution…

          Source: John Holdren, Paul and Anne Ehrlich: Ecoscience 1977, pg 837

          In the UK ‘defective’ babies are killed via the LiverPool Care Pathway. The UK government is giving millions to the NHS to kill off ‘the useless eaters’. link This is not surprising given the UK is run by Fabians.

          And it is being actively promoted on college campuses.
          If you ever wanted to know if our universities are teaching facilities or brainwashing facilities, just look at that example of a professor being traumatized by two young teens in a free speech zone sporting anti-abortion information link and compare it to the newest thoughts on campus supporting ‘After-birth Abortion’ up to the age of four years or even more. more college students willing to say they support post-birth abortion, but some students even suggest children up to 4 or 5-years-old can also be killed, because they are not yet “self aware.” We used to call it murder or infanticide but that is SOooo passé. “Since their requirements for personhood are completely arbitrary, they throw around numbers, you know, four years old, five years old. I had one friend say a college professor claimed six years old was a good cut-off,”

          Murder is now reserved for Animal Rights activists who scream it in the faces of those who eat meat or wear fur or leather.

          Peter Singer’s Bold Defense of Infanticide

          In 1993, ethicist Peter Singer shocked many Americans by suggesting that no newborn should be considered a person until 30 days after birth and that the attending physician should kill some disabled babies on the spot. Five years later, his appointment as Decamp Professor of Bio-Ethics at Princeton University ignited a firestorm of controversy,….
          As early as 1972, philosopher Michael Tooley bluntly declared that a human being “possess[es] a serious right to life only if it possesses the concept of a self as a continuing subject of experiences and other mental states, and believes that it is itself such a continuing entity.”2 Infants do not qualify.

          More recently, American University philosophy professor Jeffrey Reiman has asserted that unlike mature human beings, infants do not “possess in their own right a property that makes it wrong to kill them.” He explicitly holds that infants are not persons with a right to life and that “there will be permissible exceptions to the rule against killing infants that will not apply to the rule against killing adults and children.”….

          Last year 14 congressional Democrats viciously attacked a bill written to protect newborns who survive abortion procedures. The message was clear: The right to choose is not about a woman’s right to end a pregnancy; it’s about her right to a dead baby. Meanwhile, Wichita abortionist George Tiller kills fetuses in the third trimester of pregnancy (for only mildly disabling defects) and raises the issue with impunity on the Internet.28 Since he’s not killing kitties, he gets away with it.

          HenryP, THESE are the people who want complete control not only of the USA but the entire world and that is why I defend the Right to have guns.
          Secretary Clinton “In Awe” of Racist Eugenicist Margaret Sanger

  10. Robertv says:

    If there would be no ‘greenhouse gases’ but atmospheric pressure would be the same how would that change Earth’s temperature ?

    • Henry P says:

      it is a difficult question and I don’t know the answer. I find that at night, especially noticeable here in winter, clouds trap the heat (higher minima). During the day, especially noticeable in summer, clouds deflect a lot of heat (lower maxima).
      I am not sure if anyone has really done an experiment to determine the net effect of the cooling and warming caused by clouds.

  11. Henry P says:

    @Gail
    @Colorado

    I don’t like to use the bible to further my point. However, to answer Gail: the turning of the tables by Jesus in the temple was directed at what was being done wrong: religion for profit. The whip was used to hook the tables, to turn them over, not to hit any person. That is an important difference. Hence, the fact that, at the Crucifixion, Jesus says to the criminal next to him: today you will be with me in Paradise. God hates sin, but he loves and forgives the sinner, who repents.

    For every quote that you give me I can find another quote, e.g. Mine is vengeance, says the Lord, I will repay.
    Like I said, this is personal. It is a covenant that I made never to use guns and after 42 years of this covenant there was no situation ever where I wished I had a gun.
    That is amazing.

    I note that both of you do not answer me on the pointlessness of the wars waged by the US in Cuba, Korea, Vietnam, etc.

    Wars [and guns] are for profit. The lives lost do not count?

    Let us start turning that table. [the making of guns]

    • Gail Combs says:

      HenryP, I am not for wars at all. I agree with George Washington. Avoid foreign entanglements. I also agree with Ike, the political-military-techno establishment wants control and they want to make money out of gun running and wars.

      Also it is the presents of guns not the use of guns that we are advocating. That is a very fine distinction. For example my brother held a shotgun on two Mafia enforcers until the police could arrive. They had a third guy who managed to jump out of the car and run onto our property when the car slowed to go around the turn about at the end of the street. They were looking for a quiet road to kill him and dump the body. (We were near New York City but in the country.)

      The presence of guns keeps people esp. politicians honest.

      If I was ever put in the position where thugs were actively killing others especially children and I could stop them with a bullet or walk away and let them continue to kill? I am afraid I would choose to kill not walk away. That was why I used those passages.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Henry,
      Just one other comment from some one who left the church because of the hypocrisy I saw.

      Most of us use the English or some other translation of the bible. (I use King James) Many years ago I read a story that really stuck. In Chicago? a brilliant religious young man went into the study of the bible in its original form. He was appalled at the changes made from the original to what we have now in modern languages and left the Catholic Church as a result.

      We know the powerful rewrite history to suit their purposes. link 1 and link 2 We know the Roman church has been corrupt and we know they along with the aristocracy ruled for a thousand years. Wouldn’t tweaking religion so it tells the peasants to never fight back, that poverty is godly and your reward is in heaven make sense?

      Sorry, I just can not get my head around Jesus (or any honorable man) sitting back and watching thugs beat a child or woman to death and not intervening even if it meant picking up a sword.

      And yes I am aware of the Romans and the lions.

    • Let us start turning that table.

      Henry,

      I respect your faith and I took your points very seriously as shown in my comments above. The conflict of self-defense and non-violence is one of the central questions of the Christian faith. People have struggled with it through the history and there is no way it can be resolved in a few comments on this blog interspersed in a thread about NY weather.

      I would like to point out that you did not pay me the same respect in answering seriously but just as importantly, I don’t feel slighted by it. I am not important and I understand these are difficult questions. I easily accept the fact that good people can completely disagree on fundamental issues—I’ve seen it all my life. There are only so many things that I can hope to resolve during my life on this Earth. The rest must wait.

      So nothing really changes for me. My true enemies have in the past successfully denied me my natural God-given right to worship as I please, my liberties and my right to self-defense. I will continue living with the knowledge that they will at times stand against me in coalition with good men who—for reasons of their own—will support their schemes to disarm me. That is my burden as I understand it, in my undeniably very limited capacity.

      I pray for God’s guidance, I pray for peace on Earth and I pray that the moment never comes when I would have to stand my ground against you.

      I wish you and your family a blessed and wondrous new year.

      • Gail Combs says:

        “The conflict of self-defense and non-violence is one of the central questions of the Christian faith. People have struggled with it through the history…..”

        It is a very thorny question for not only Christians but other religions.
        Gandhian non-violence

        They say that in Saharan�pur the Mussal�mans looted houses, broke open safes and, in one case, a Hindu woman’s modesty was outraged. Whose fault was this? Mussalmans can offer no defence for the execrable conduct, it is true. But I, as a Hindu, am more ashamed of Hindu cowardice than I am angry at the Mussalman bullying. Why did not the owners of the houses looted die in the attempt to defend their possessions? Where were the relatives of the outraged sister at the time of the outrage? Have they no account to render of themselves? My non-violence does not admit of running away from danger and leaving dear ones unprotected. Between violence and cowardly flight, I can only prefer violence to cowardice.”

        I would strongly suggest that those who support non-violence ALSO SUPPORT the protectors who would stand in front of them.

        As far as I can see you have:
        1. Parasites – Those who rather steal, enslave or murder instead of producing.

        2. Producers – Those who produce wealth and just want to be left alone to get on with building civilization.

        3. Protectors – Those who are outraged by the atrocities caused by the Parasites and are willing to do something about it.

        The biggest problem, as Henry has identified, is the Parasites often pose as Protectors, hoping to scam the Producers. Unfortunately 99% of the world’s politicians are Parasites. These leaves the ordinary citizen to assume the roll of Protector or be robbed enslaved or possibly murdered.

      • Henry P says:

        People have struggled with it through the history and there is no way it can be resolved in a few comments on this blog interspersed in a thread about NY weather.

        Henry says
        True. It is a very difficult subject and we could argue and argue for hours.
        True, I agree there is a difference “taking up the sword” i.e. starting a war for gain (oil/profit /sale of weapons, etc)
        and using it to defend the innocent.
        I appreciate US helped Europe get rid of Hitler. That was to defend the innocent, I am sure. I am not so sure about US motivations for wars in later times in other countries.
        What can you say about that?

        As I said, I don’t need a gun, because I know that God will protect me. However, the covenant I made is probably unique. I donot expect any of you to follow it unless you clearly heard His Voice about it.

        • Neal S says:

          I don’t doubt that If my circumstances were the same as yours (Henry P), that I might not arrive at the same conclusion about personally owning a firearm. But I do think there might be some wisdom in not being publicly forthcoming about such a decision. I have owned firearms in the past and I will certainly own some in the future.

          The last time I was asked about my gun ownership status and if I happened to have said weapon with me at that time, I wound up being robbed at gunpoint and later shot at.

          If I am ever asked again, I will not be forthcoming with the truth, unless I believe it will help protect me and those that I care for.

        • Henry P says:

          It is really your [bad] experience that you had that led you to giving me this warning. I appreciate. Thanks for the advice.

        • Yes, Henry, we do agree on much. There is a fundamental difference between self-defense and aggression. It also is a very serious decision to join wars in progress. Starting them without aggression committed by another power is aggression but even if hostilities are already in progress, we should be very careful with the decision to take sides.

          I do not believe the US should have joined the Great War (aka The War to End All Wars, aka WWI). President Wilson betrayed his campaign assurances to the American people who were largely against our participation and in a true Progressive fashion not only entered the war but also totally screwed up the Versailles treaty negotiations, paving the way for the rise of Hitler in Germany.

          In the following chain of events, our country helped to get rid the world of Hitler but strengthened the equally evil Stalin regime and paved the way for Communism’s brutal domination of large parts of Europe and horrible Soviet proxy wars throughout the world.

          We were attacked by and spent blood and treasure to rid Asia of a murderous Japanese regime but we paved the way for the rise of Communism in China and other parts of Asia. Brutal Communist aggressions followed in its wake in Korea and Indochina.

          Do I need to go on? George Washington understood the brutality of war before he accepted command in the Revolutionary War against the British government. Like other military men, he knew that war is hell and there are no easy outcomes. Like our Founders I believe the American Revolution was just and its success changed world history for better but many decent Loyalists suffered horribly for keeping their oath to the King.

          I frequently notice people drawing a distinction between wars among state belligerents and wars of governments against their own people as if the latter were not wars. The dozens of millions killed by modern Progressive governments in the 20th century alone show the idiocy of such thinking. The US didn’t wage much war on Cuba but Fidel Castro just like all Communists waged a long war against his own people.

          Eisenhower understood the brutality of war and he understood the dangers of a modern administrative state run by a Progressive bureaucracy allied with the armament industry. He knew the United States won against Germany and Japan because of our industrial production ability but at the same time he warned us about the power of the military-industrial complex and the hijacking of government by the same interests. He didn’t make his farewell address about the dangers of free citizens owning firearms as the current occupant of the White House is likely to do.

          It is never easy but I’m sure you know it.

          “Military-Industrial Complex” Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

  12. Henry P says:

    Jason Calley says
    https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/12/27/hot-weather-is-a-thing-of-the-past-in-new-york/#comment-561720

    Henry says
    Your quote is out of context.
    Namely, see what happens next in Luke ch 22 vs 51:
    No more of this [where Jesus referred to the use of those swords]
    According to Matthew he then adds the statement:
    52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
    Matt 26:52 (NIV)

    So there is no mistaken in the message that Jesus gives: the words he said in Luke 22 vs 36 were meant: we have to prepare for a war.
    A spiritual war.

    I did explain all of this in chapter 16 of my book
    http://www.hourofpower.org/global/south_africa/news/JesusisGodbook.doc

    perhaps you missed it.
    perhaps read it again, carefully.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Henry, thanks for your kind reply. While you may find pacifism a desireable response to evil, I cannot agree. If that in fact was what Jesus preached (and inerrency of the Bible is diffiicult to support) then so be it, but I am unwilling to follow it. As for wars, I hate them. Usually wars have two aggressors, always at leat one. The only form of war I can support is that of the attacked against the aggressor. If you get a chance google Smedley Butler’s essay, “War Is A Racket.” To me it is a national shame how the U.S. has become the aggressor in so many wars around the world. God forgive us as a nation, but those wars have not been fought with my approval.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Jason, the American people were hoodwinked into the wars. In 1913 the international Banksters got the Federal Reserve Act passed.

        In 1915 the Morgan interests (including munitions) took over the US news . in order to control public opinion. Prior to this America stayed out of world politics. With the Fed now in the position to ‘lend’ the US government money for wars, the USA has been a debt slave to the War Mongers ever since. U.S. Congressional Record February 9, 1917, page 2947

        Congressman McFadden in a speech before Congress tells us the twelve international private credit monopolies that formed the Fed also took money out of this Country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia, and thus drove a wedge between the allies in World War.

        Congressman Charles Lindbergh Sr. led the fight against enactment of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. Short timeline
        Lindbergh Sr. accused Wilson of being in cahoots with Jacob Shift, and Paul Warburg, and said the act could be used to “scientifically created depressions”.

        April 6, 1917, USA enters WWI

        Woodrow Wilson ordered government agents to seize, and destroy, the printing plates for Lindbergh Sr.’s book, “Why Your Country Is at War” (So much for freedom of the press.) link (Original link dead)

        Lindbergh Jr seeing his father’s predictions come true in 1929, become vocal against Roosevelt. Roosevelt stripped Lindberg of his air force commission, refused to let him re-enlist, and sicced the FBI on him.

        1932 Lindbergh Jr’s child is kidnapped, ransom is paid, and later the body with a bullet hole in the head is found. A demoralized and demonized Lindbergh Jr did not run for president against FDR.

        It is interesting that the anti-communist, anti-war Lindenberghs are still labeled Fascist in the banker controlled news. (Clinton’s “Third Way” is just a renaming of Fascism BTW.)

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Gail! Not that you need my agreement, but for what it is worth, I think that you and I have come to very similar understandings of what happened to the Republic. To a very large extent, the history of the US for the last 120 years or so has been the history of wars against any nation that resisted either US corporate control, or refused to be part of the world system of centralized banks.

      • Henry P says:

        Thanks Jason, I do understand your reluctance on pacifism [in its most divine form – think of people like Ghandi /go see the movie]

        and we do agree on hating wars.

        Going through history, even back to Roman days, you will find that wars were [mostly] always for profit or land.
        Even IS (Islamic State) is supplied by US and RU weapons (via Arab states). Now we both have RU and US fighting IS. It is ridiculous, when you think about it, if it were not so tragic for the Christians, women and others trapped in this war.

        • Henry P says:

          ”It is ridiculous, when you think about it, if it were not so tragic for the Christians, women and others trapped in this war.”

          Yes, Henry, I agree. It is tragic for the people trapped there. The thing that is all too often ignored is that they were trapped there under Islamist rule before any war against ISIS started. German and other European Jews were trapped under Nazi rule long before WWII formally broke out in September 1939.

          Colorado Wellington says:

          ”I frequently notice people drawing a distinction between wars among state belligerents and wars of governments against their own people as if the latter were not wars. “

          https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/12/27/hot-weather-is-a-thing-of-the-past-in-new-york/#comment-561773

          And yes, there is always the ridiculousness factor. A lot of American machinery and armaments sent to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease Act military aid during WWII in support of their war against the Third Reich was later used by the Soviet Communists to defeat democratic movements.

          One example is the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 and the bloody suppression of their uprising against the Communist rule. And if my memory serves me well, the Warsaw Pact countries were still using some WWII American trucks in their invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 (rah may be able to help there).

          Objects do not have will and they do not act. Only people do.

      • Henry P says:

        Dear Jason, I am not sure if you will still read this, but I did give your comment some considerable thought.Like I said before, it appears from examples given, e.g. Ghandi, that you can wage war without the use of weapons. This, I think, is the ultimate lesson that Jesus tried to teach us, during his last days of His physical being on earth…You just have to realize that your faith is stronger than any weapon held against you.
        Also, in the end, we have to try and live our life coming as close as possible to that of Christ, reacting to seemingly random circumstances. We won’t reach that target 100% of the time….
        So be content with trying to do your best. You don’t have to worry, or hurry. God loves you always, if even if we go or do wrong.

  13. Henry P says:

    Anyways, I must tell you, that this year I was most amazed to find that the sun, the planets and indeed the whole universe appears to work like a clock. Everywhere I looked, I saw God’s hand, moving that clock. Even in the yearly rainfall, although it sometimes looks chaotic, you can see that the climate just works like a pendulum.

    So, perhaps most comfortingly to know for most of you, I discovered there is no man made climate change that makes the earth warmer……Namely, if there were any, it should affect minimum temperatures most, and, as you can see in the graph below, it does not. There is no chaos. Everything is exactly on a 100% curve….

    This year, this was the ball that God threw at me that really struck me, and I thought I’d share this important knowledge and wisdom with all of you here. God is in control. Of everything.
    It is our job to turn the tables.
    Wishing you all a blessed and prosperous 2016!

    • Gail Combs says:

      A wonderful new year to you too Henry.

      And may we all hope and pray God gives us a way out of the mess the elite are trying to drag us into. I really really do not want to see WWIII with nuclear weapons tossed about in the middle east and by North Korea.

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