Welcome to Daily Trivia. There is a game to play here. The photo above relates to one of the items below. The first reader to correctly tell us in the comments what item the photo belongs to, and why, gets bragging rights. Sometimes they are obvious, other times the obvious answer is the decoy. Can you figure it out tonight?
Genghis Khan exempted the poor and clergy from taxes, encouraged literacy, and established free religion, leading many peoples to join his empire before they were even conquered. (source) Â Read more »
Can someone tell me what is inside that can?
…and there is QUALITY Spooge?
Good Evening, welcomeÂ to the daily Whaleoil Backchat.
You donât have to stay âon topicâ in these posts like you do in all others. Feel free to share your own stories, links to other news or catch up with friends. If you havenât tried it before, signing in to a Disqus account is free, quick, and it is easy.
New commenters should familiarise themselves with ourÂ Commenting and Moderation rules. Thank you.
TroubleÂ commentingÂ on Whaleoil?Â Read this first.Â You can receive free help. Do not email via the Contact Page.
Just emailÂ [email protected]Â with your concerns. Â PleaseÂ be polite and as precise as you can be. Â Remember: this is a volunteer service provided by other Whaleoil readers. Â Only contact them with commenting related problems.
James Delingpole explains the inherent dishonesty of climate change proponents and their manipulated temperature records.
How can we believe in âglobal warmingâ when the temperature records providing the âevidenceâ for that warming cannot be trusted?
Itâs a big question â and one which many people, even on the sceptical side of the argument, are reluctant to ask.
[B]efore I go into technical detail about why the temperature records are suspect, let me provide an analogy which ought to make it perfectly clear to any neutral parties reading this why the problem Iâm about to describe ought not to be consigned to the realms of crackpottery.
Suppose say, that for the last 100 years my family have been maintaining a weather station at the bottom of our garden, diligently recording the temperatures day by day, and that what these records show is this: that in the 1930s it was jolly hot â even hotter than in the 1980s; that since the 1940s it has been cooling.
What conclusions would you draw from this hard evidence?
Well the obvious one, I imagine, is that the dramatic Twentieth Century warming that people like Al Gore have been banging on about is a crock. At least according to this particular weather station it is.
Now how would you feel if you went and took these temperature records along to one of the worldâs leading global warming experts â say Gavin Schmidt at NASA or Phil Jones at CRU or Michael Mann at Penn State â and they studied your records for a moment and said: âThis isnât right.â What if they then crossed out all your temperature measurements, did a few calculations on the back of an envelope, and scribbled in their amendments? And you studied those adjustments and you realised, to your astonishment, that the new, pretend temperature measurements told an entirely different story from the original, real temperature measurements: that where before your records showed a cooling since the 1940s they now showed a warming trend.
Youâd be gobsmacked, would you not?
The left-wing used to be about freedom of speech, freedom of expression and liberal ideas.
They have increasingly become totalitarian which is to be expected considering the ideologies they have sprung from.
Constantly wanting to control our speech, our thoughts and ideas and what we eat and drink.
Alex Wickham at Breitbart explains:
âThe haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happyâ. So said H.L. Mencken of late nineteenth and early twentieth century Puritanism; the tyrannical do-gooders of the temperance movement, authoritarians pushing their Victorian values on âsinnersâ across the Atlantic.
Whether it was booze, sex, drugs or whatever form of permissiveness they thought was destroying western civilization from within, the Puritans of the last hundred years have been conservatives. Reactionary, traditional to the point of totalitarian, these were people who did not like change and would make sure you knew it. Post-war, they detested liberals, these new, amoral, sandal-wearing, pot-smoking, freedom-loving hippies. Typified by the social conservatism of Mary Whitehouse, hectoring the public with their controlling views, the Puritans were not on the side of liberty.
Today, Puritanism has changed. It is still not on the side of liberty. It is still hectoring, controlling, freedom-hating and totalitarian. It is still haunted by the fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy. The difference is the New Puritans are not conservatives, they are liberals. Ironic and perverse given the pro-freedom, anti-authoritarian aspirations of their purported ideology, the mantle of Puritanism has been assumed by so-called liberals, by so-called progressives.
Prime Minister John Key is facing increasing questions about his handling of the Mike Sabin affair after the Northland MP’s resignation a month after reports he was being investigated by the police.
Mr Sabin announced he had resigned yesterday, citing personal issues that were best dealt with outside Parliament. He would not make any further comments.
It is understood some within National learned Mr Sabin was dealing with issues before the election but he had already been selected as a candidate and it was too late to change.
The real problem is that Sabin thought his situation was survivable. Â He played his “issues” down to National and his missus and promised it would all go away. Â In essence, he sold Key and his colleagues a load of hot air. Â Read more »