Blogs Are Cool

Follow my blog with bloglovin

Mind your business

http://menaregrass.blogspot.com/

Folks, this is the Month that we RE-TAKE AMERICA 

********* Get Ready *********



We can't give up on this issue. 



Andy Rooney and Prayer





Andy Rooney says:



I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December. I don't agree with Darwin, but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school teacher taught his Theory of Evolution. 

Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered because someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game. So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire Book of Acts.

They're just talking to a God they believe in and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game. 

But it's a Christian prayer, some will argue.

 Yes, and this is the United States of America, a country founded on Christian principles. According to our very own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all others better than 200-to-1...
So what would you expect -- somebody chanting Hare Krishna?


If I went to a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer.


If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer. 


If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha.





And I wouldn't be offended.

It wouldn't bother me one bit.


When in Rome

.....

But what about the atheists? Is another argument.


What about them? Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We're not going to pass the collection plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds. If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom... Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer! 

Unfortunately, one or two will make that call. One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do.

I don't think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's foundations. 

Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights.
Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before eating, to pray before we go to sleep.
Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing.
Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying.



God, help us. And if that last sentence offends you, well, just sue me.



The silent majority has been silent too long. It's time we tell that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard that the vast majority doesn't care what they want. It is time that the majority rules! It's time we tell them, "You don't have to pray; you don't have to say the Pledge of Allegiance; you don't have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him. That is your right, and we will honor your right; but by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away.

We are fighting back, and we WILL WIN!"

 God bless us one and all...Especially those who denounce Him, God bless America, despite all her faults She is still the greatest nation of all.
God bless our service men who are fighting to protect our right to pray and worship God.



Let's make 2010 the year the silent majority is heard and we put God back as the foundation of our families and institutions. And our military forces come home from all the wars. 

Keep looking up.






If you agree with this, please pass it on.




Talking About The Weather - website

This is not a permitted re-post of the article GOOGLEGATE?
from the website "Talking About The Weather" http://talkingabouttheweather.com/
--- If this re-post is in violation of something, somehow and you do not want it to be re-posted on this website, please contact me @ Jenningsroofs@gmail.com and I will gladly take it down immediately. Other than that, please enjoy, and pass on a link to everyone you know.

Everyone should be typing into the search box “climategate” or "c l i m a t e g a t e" many times a day, just to flood their algorithms at google.com

This is a sad occurrence, if a search engine company Like www.google.com is guilty of trying to do exactly the same type of shenanigans that the so called scientists were doing when they were caught hiding the truth.

- "Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing" Dr. Phil -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Talking About The Weather
Googlegate? December 2nd 2009
Posted in Climate change, global warming by Harold Ambler on December 2, 2009

Googlegate?

Google's headquarters in Mountain View, California. According to an anonymous search-engine industry professional, questions regarding Google's Suggest function are an everyday occurrence, fruit of what he described as "endless conspiracy theories." Google Earth image by Martin Stehr.
__________________________________________________________
Among the points of interest in the unfolding climate scandal is the fact that the term “climategate” rapidly eclipsed global warming in the number of links produced by a simple Google search.

As is standard, Google’s auto-suggest function facilitated this, several days into the story’s evolution. Anyone typing in the letters c-l-i would see the suggested time-saving choice of climategate. Within a day or two of the auto-suggest function being added for “climategate” it had become the top item in the list.

Suddenly, though, on Monday December 1, Google stopped offering “climategate” as a choice to those who typed c-l-i and even to those who typed c-l-i-m-a-t-e-g-a-t. Strange.

Intrigued, I sent a few questions to Google’s Global Communications Department and a polite gentleman by the name of Jake Hubert responded right away.

This is what he wrote back in an e-mail:

Hi Harold,

I can verify that Google has not ever removed the query [climategate] or variations of the query from Google Suggest. It was never a “decision” as you suggest in your question, but instead it may have disappeared from the Suggest feature because of a normal update of the Suggest feature. The suggestions change dynamically over time through automated processes based on relevance algorithms.

Google Suggest uses a variety of algorithms in order to come up with relevant suggestions while the user is typing. We do remove certain clearly pornographic or hateful or malicious slur terms from Suggest, but we have not removed anything in this case.

Hope this helps,

Jake

In my response, I pointed out that the number of links produced by a “climategate” query was growing by leaps and bounds, drawing attention to the fact that “climategate” had eclipsed global warming (by that point) by more than half. (The doubling would be completed in the next 24 hours.)

Could he double-check with his product team?

His response was not surprising:

Hi Harold,

I hear what you’re saying, and I have already verified my prior statement with our product team.

Thanks,

Jake

At this point, although I suspected I was getting the run-around, I thought I’d give Jake once last shot at solving this problem:

Hi Jake,

I’m not questioning whether your product team confirmed your statement. Thank you again for that. I wonder, though, whether they have the complete story.

For instance, I wonder whether you and they have run some experiments just to see how odd this is? In your first response, you wrote, “The suggestions change dynamically over time through automated processes based on relevance algorithms.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the relevance algorithms work according to numbers of searches and links. Google Suggest fills in, for instance, both your name (although your name search produces only 680,000 links) and my name (which produces only 1,690,000 links). Climategate, on the other hand, yields 16 million links (growing by the hour), but Google Suggest doesn’t provide suggestions. So, the math doesn’t appear to add up.

Would it be possible to give me an example of another word or phrase that is yielding more and more hits (has more than 15 million already) but that Google Suggest does not in-fill (or stops during the word or phrase’s ascendancy)?

Barring such examples, this has the appearance of a political decision from high up the chain of command.

Would it be possible to provide me with contact information for a press officer at Google at the executive level?

Thank you in advance.

Regards,

Harold

Unlike the previous efforts at communication, this one was met with silence. At that point, I thought it might save time to work my way up the chain of command. I e-mailed a letter to Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO, to whom I forwarded my correspondence with Jake. Toward the end of my letter I wrote the following:

Unfortunately, what this situation appears like is one in which someone with an interest in suppressing Climategate prevailed upon someone within the Google structure to remove Climategate from the list of auto-suggests. (Other phrases starting with climate are still Google-suggested even though they have many fewer links than Climategate.)

I asked him if it would it be possible to have someone from his staff look into this. I also asked if it would be possible to interview him by phone. Failing that, I said, perhaps I could send him a list of questions?

After sending the message, I went out to pick up my daughter from nursery school. When I returned, there was a message from Jake on my answering machine. Without boring readers with the entirety of the message, the takeaway was the statement “No need to contact the CEO.”

I returned Jake’s call and we spent a pleasant ten minutes on the phone, during which he explained that there was “no conspiracy,” that the algorithm governing Google Suggest simply had its own idiosyncracies, things of that nature. Nothing remotely credible, I am afraid, although I have no doubt that Jake was sincere.

I decided then to try another e-mail to Eric Schmidt (Sorry about that, Jake!). In the meantime, I’d seen that Google searching “climategate” (if one was willing to type in the whole phrase) now produced 22 million links.

Dear Mr. Schmidt,

Thank you for following up with Jake Hubert, who has reached out to me by telephone.

Unfortunately, the explanation makes no more sense by phone than it did by e-mail.

Climategate generates 22 million links on the main Google search engine. Global warming, by comparison, generates fewer than 11 million.

The idea that a numbers-driven algorithm stopped Google Suggest from filling in Climategate is absurd on its face. (Google Suggest, as it should, continues to in-fill global warming when a user begins typing it.)

These are my questions for you and your staff:

1. Was Google contacted by Al Gore or any one of his business associates regarding climategate searches on Google? If so, when did the approach take place?

2. What was the process that led to the decision to remove Climategate from the Google Suggest function?

3. Will Climategate be added to the list of Google Suggest items again?

4. Does Google feel that it acted according to its own highest ethical principles in this matter?

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Harold Ambler

I pushed send, got my daughter into her gymnastics gear, and rushed out the door. When I returned a little less than two hours later, I put my sleeping daughter on the couch and rushed upstairs to check my e-mail. Nada. Then I did a Google search, typing c-l-i-m … and there it was – offered by the gloriously user-friendly Google Suggest function – “climategate.”

Coincidence?

You never know.

Was Google briefly complicit in the largest scientific scandal in at least a generation, attempting to minimize it behind the scenes? Like I said, you never, ever, ever, ever know. Ever.

P.S. Four hours after the function returned, Google Suggest on “climategate” was altered again. Instead of the single word “climategate,” which yields 27 million links per search, Google now offers “climate gate scandal,” which yields 6 million. Only by hand-typing the complete word “climategate,” to the last letter, can users view an additional 21 million links. The evident message from on high? “Tamp it down.” The apparent success of the strategy: close to non-existent.

P.P.S. As of three days after this post (on Saturday December 5, that is), Google Suggest no longer offers any choices for C-l-i-m-a-t-e-g-a-t-e, no matter how many letters one types. The total number of links appears to be stable around 30 million. The first reader who finds any Google search with 30 million or more links that Google Suggest doesn’t assist with wins the prize.
Tagged with: Al Gore, climategate, Eric Schmidt, global warming, Google

- - - - - -WOW!
...And it goes on

Today, Google’s handy helper seems to have had a change of heart.

Search Engines Censoring ClimateGate?

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
November 30, 2009

A fantastic article written by Christopher Brooker of the London Telegraph exposing the climate change fraud rocketed to the very top of a Google News search for “global warming,” only to disappear hours later.

“What is going on at Google? I only ask because last night when I typed “Global Warming” into Google News the top item was Christopher Booker’s superb analysis of the Climategate scandal,” writes James Delingpole.

“It’s still the most-read article of the Telegraph’s entire online operation – 430 comments and counting – yet mysteriously when you try the same search now it doesn’t even feature. Instead, the top-featured item is a blogger pushing Al Gore’s AGW agenda. Perhaps there’s nothing sinister in this. Perhaps some Google-savvy reader can enlighten me.”

Another blogger noted how other versions of the article appeared, but the original had been “disappeared,” despite the fact that other London Telegraph articles showed up as the top ranked result when entering their headline.

“That is using the search string: “Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation” – which is the full headline of the piece. It shows up where it has been quoted in full by other sites, but of the Booker column there is no sign,” writes Richard North.

Now that Climategate is heating up...

Now that Climategate is heating up, the scientists
at the Climatic Research Unit at the University
of Anglia have agreed to release all their data
to the public.

from The UK Telegraph:

David Holland is seeking prosecutions against
some of Britain's most eminent academics for
allegedly holding back information in breach
of disclosure laws. Photo: DAVID ROSE

First, one has to wonder why this information
was never made public from the get go.
One would think with so many world governments
willing to wreck their economies over climate
change, that the very data supporting climate change
would have been exposed to the light of day already.

While exposing this data to millions will seem to
be the answer to clearing up the whole climate change
debate once and for all, there seems to be a major
fly in the ointment.

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA)
have admitted throwing away much of the
raw temperature data on which their predictions
of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to
check basic calculations said to show a long-term
rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was
forced to reveal the loss following requests
for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations
around the world and then adjusted to take
account of variables in the way they were collected.
The revised figures were kept, but the originals
— stored on paper and magnetic tape —
were dumped to save space when the CRU
moved to a new building.

The admission follows the leaking of a
thousand private emails sent and received
by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director.
In them he discusses thwarting climate
sceptics seeking access to such data.

In a statement on its website,
the CRU said: “We do not hold the
original raw data but only the
value-added (quality controlled
and homogenised) data.”

In other words all we are going to see is data that
has already been manipulated with no way of proving
just how the data was manipulated. The more you
peel back the onion here, the more man made climate
change is looking like a big fat hoax carried out by a
bunch of bullies masquerading as scientists.

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats are still
going to be willing to push Cap and Trade with
climate change looking so shady. It will also be one
hell of a YouTube moment when some enterprising
journalist corners Al Gore on Climategate.

-- Bad people love corrupting power.
The pleasant use power to love. --

There was no Miracle on the Hudson

There was no Miracle on the Hudson

Oh MSNBC

Oh MSNBC

All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field

Hear 1 Peter: 1 from the Bible right now

















1 Peter 1: 13-25

Be Holy

¹³Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed.
¹⁴As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance.
¹⁵But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do;
¹⁶for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."
¹⁷Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear.
¹⁸For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers,
¹⁹but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.
²⁰He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.
²¹Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.
²²Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart.
²³For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.
²⁴For, "All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall,
²⁵but the word of the Lord stands forever."

Here Romans from the bible right now


















Romans 10: 17
¹⁷Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.