Og det var Danmark…og det var Danmark…

Forud for folkeafstemningen i Schweiz viste meningsmålerne et nej til forbudet mod skrigetårne ved moskéerne.

Nu har man dumdristigt vovet en meningsmåling i Mohammedanmark. Samarbejds-Politiken er forfærdet:

Danskerne vil traske i schweizernes fodspor, hvis der bliver afholdt en folkeafstemning om et forbud mod minareter. En Megafon-måling viser 51 procents opbakning til forbuddet, mens kun 34 procent vil tillade minareter. Dermed er der massiv folkelig modstand mod de konkrete byggeplaner, der opereres med i København og Roskilde. Meningsmålingen bliver mødt med tilfredshed hos Dansk Folkeparti, der om kort tid fremsætter et forslag i Folketinget om afholdelse af en folkeafstemning. »Jeg er overbevist om, at hvis vi fik en folkeafstemning, så ville modstanden mod minareter vokse og blive meget massiv i løbet af den debat, der vil gå forud for afstemningen. En minaret vil kun være det første skridt på vejen mod en stormoske, og langsomt får vi flere og flere islamiske symboler, som danskerne ikke ønsker«, siger formand Pia Kjærsgaard.  Hun mener ikke, at et forbud mod minareter vil komme i konflikt med Grundlovens bestemmelser om religionsfrihed eller være diskriminerende i forhold til et religiøst mindretal.

»Det er noget vrøvl at kalde et minaret-forbud for diskrimination. Vi siger jo ikke, at vi vil forbyde moskeer. Men vi vil ikke tolerere minareterne, fordi så snart vi begynder at snakke om stormoskeer, så er det en udvikling, vi ikke ønsker i Danmark, fordi vi ved, de kan virke som samlingspunkt for islamistiske ekstremister«, siger partiformanden.

De sidste to trediedele af artiklen er naturligvis udtalelser fra spidserne i Venstre, Socialdhimmikratiet og andre Gutmenschen, som mener, at folk helt – ganske og aldeles – har misforstået det hele. Akkurat som de brave eds-sammensvorne i Schweiz…

DDR-Journalisten Steffen Kretz rejser Jorden rundt for at berette om klimaforandringer (og brænde tonsvis af CO2 af)

Så jeg vil da godt lige gøre opmærksom på hans form for journalistik endnu en gang:

Jeg så denne her i kommentarerne på Uriasposten (skrevet af Ulrik #20) og huggede den:

Steffen Kretz var, som “klima korrespondet” i Grønland, her hvor jeg bor. En af mine venner er fisker og fanger og Steffen Kretz opsøgte ham og forklarede ham at han i et interview gerne ville have ham til at sige: “Man kan ikke længere skyde sæler på isen pga klimaforandringer”, min ven svarede at det ville han ikke, for det ville være en løgn, godtnok forandrer naturen sig, måske menneskeskabt, måske ikke, men sæler kan man altså stadig skyde på isen. Steffen Kretz sagde så: “Men kan du så henvise mig til en fanger der vil sige det?”.
Hvad driver mon sådan en journalist!?

Iøvrigt er det jo tankevækkende, at TV er fyldt med indslag om ‘gode’ mennesker, der rejser hid og did for at gøre opmærksom på ‘klimaproblemerne.

København: Gratis sex til klimamøde deltagere

Ved å framvise offisielt akkrediteringskort for FN-møtet, samt et postkort fra kommunenes anti-prostitusjonskampanje, vil delegatene kunne benytte seg av 79 organiserte sexarbeidere helt gratis.

Vi gjør dette for å skape oppmerksomhet om et problem: At København kommune under toppmøtet profilerer seg selv på bekostning av en helt lovlig bransje.

Mere på Dagbladet.

De er skøre de nordmænd

38-åringen er tiltalt for grove overgrep mot flere jenter under ti år.

Nå er rettssaken utsatt fordi han skal på ferie til Thailand.

Klimaforandringernes matematik

The forecasts of global warming are based on mathematical solutions for equations of weather models.

But all of these solutions are inaccurate. Therefore, no valid scientific conclusions can be made concerning global warming. The false claim for the effectiveness of mathematics is an unreported scandal at least as important as the recent climate data fraud. Why is the math important? And why don’t the climatologists use it correctly?

As an expert in the solutions of non-linear differential equations, I can attest to the fact that the more than two-dozen non-linear differential equations in weather models are too difficult for humans to have any idea how to solve accurately. No approximation over long time periods has any chance of accurately predicting global warming. Yet approximation is exactly what the global warming advocates are doing. Each of the more than thirty models being used around the world to predict the weather is just a different inaccurate approximation of the weather equations. (Of course, this is an issue only if the model of the weather is correct. It is probably not, because the climatologists probably do not understand all of the physical processes determining the weather.)

 

Hele artiklen på American Thinker

Hovedpunkterne i ClimateGate

Christopher Monckton writes the first book(let) on Climategate, the greatest scientific scandal in our lifetime.

The summary:

The whistleblower’s data file revealed, for the first time, the innermost workings of the tiny international clique of climate scientists, centered on the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia, that has been the prime mover in telling the world that it is warming at an unprecedented rate, and that humankind is responsible… He had revealed what many had long suspected:

# A tiny clique of politicized scientists, paid by unscientific politicians with whom they were financially and politically linked, were responsible for gathering and reporting data on temperatures from the palaeoclimate to today’s climate. The “Team”, as they called themselves, were bending and distorting scientific data to fit a nakedly political story-line profitable to themselves and congenial to the governments that, these days, pay the bills for 99% of all scientific research.

# The Climate Research Unit at East Anglia had profited to the tune of at least $20 million in “research” grants from the Team’s activities.

# The Team had tampered with the complex, bureaucratic processes of the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, so as to exclude inconvenient scientific results from its four Assessment Reports, and to influence the panel’s conclusions for political rather than scientific reasons.

# The Team had conspired in an attempt to redefine what is and is not peer-reviewed science for the sake of excluding results that did not fit what they and the politicians with whom they were closely linked wanted the UN’s climate panel to report.

# They had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.

# They had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures in the paleoclimate.

# They had expressed dismay at the fact that, contrary to all of their predictions, global temperatures had not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years, and had been falling for nine years. They had admitted that their inability to explain it was “a travesty”. This internal doubt was in contrast to their public statements that the present decade is the warmest ever, and that “global warming” science is settled.

# They had interfered with the process of peer-review itself by leaning on journals to get their friends rather than independent scientists to review their papers.

# They had successfully leaned on friendly journal editors to reject papers reporting results inconsistent with their political viewpoint.

# They had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase and corrupt science for political purposes.

# They had mounted a venomous public campaign of disinformation and denigration of their scientific opponents via a website that they had expensively created.

# Contrary to all the rules of open, verifiable science, the Team had committed the criminal offense of conspiracy to conceal and then to destroy computer codes and data that had been legitimately requested by an external researcher who had very good reason to doubt that their “research” was either honest or competent.

Stakkels Al Gore :-)

Begge hugget på Greenie Watch

Socialkammeraten Henrik Dam Kristensen udtaler i DDR-P1-Debat om minareter (4/12 2009)

“Der findes islamiske lande, hvor man godt må bygge kirker.”

Det ville jeg da gerne have uddybet – men det blev det ikke.

Hvilke lande?

Thomas Sneum – en dansk patriot

Ny bog om frihedskæmperen, som vi tidligere har skrevet om.

Anmeldelsen er fra ‘Reserven’ no 4, 2009. Side 19.

Civilister dræbt af Israel under operation Cast Lead

Se nogle af dem på video hos Elder of Ziyon.