Red Eagle Politics channel on Youtube gone

red eagle youtube channel update

It was down for more than a day, but it appears to be up again.

I would have posted sooner, but he does have a Rumble account, and I thought I would wait for his response before posting anything. The video is pretty straightforward, and explains the situation.

To me, there was no reason for shutting down than for politics. He has a pro-Trump viewpoint, and is strongly Republican. If you censor on the basis of politics, then you've got one-party totalitarianism.

Also, YouTube is supposed to be neutral. Obviously, this is not enforced. Selective enforcement is also totalitarian.

That's the direction we're heading. Surely you people won't like that if it succeeds.

Everything they tell you is a lie

There. I said it. The central truth to our society now is this: it is all based upon falsity. The entire system is set up to divert you from truth. Ok. If that's too all pervasive, then the entire political system certainly is dishonest.

Yes, and the political system is wrecking everything else that might have some integrity left.

I'm focusing on AGW because that is one of the biggest lies out there. I can keep finding reasons why it is bunk. Now get this: if this bothers you in any way, then why is that? You should be indignant. But my guess is that this dishonesty can continue as long as people let it continue. But watch out. Once the lies stop working, the iron fist is not far behind. It is like the Aesop's Fable about the lamb and the wolf. The wolf will end up doing whatever he pleases because force has the better of the argument. Until you can overcome the wolf, the wolf will always win. Make no mistake, DC is being run by the wolves.

Voting for the GOP won't help. The GOP is in on the deception as well. The GOP pretends to oppose the Democrats. They give you just enough hope to believe that they will actually do what they say, but in the end, they will betray.

What to do, then? That is actually a hard problem because a lot of it is going to hurt. It is easy to continue as we are, and that is why nothing is likely to be done about it.

Once again, they are lying to us. On CTH, Sundance has a post on the central problem. The central problem is always going to be some facet of dishonesty. If they were honest, the problems can be dealt with. As long as they are the way they are now, nothing can be fixed. Things are going to get worse.

I think I'm dead on the target here. The reason it doesn't click is that people just don't care to address what the real problem is. It is the total lack of integrity in our political system. Nobody will address that. For the longest time on this blog, I've been talking about the lack of respect for the truth. Well, there it is.

Solutions are possible. But not until people stop being so gullible.

Densest gas known question answered, AGW 118 ( I think)

Wikipedia link

This link comes from a search according to the title of this post.

The idea comes from recent posts about mass being more responsible for global warming, if it were to exist. ( which it does not, nor could it ever happen by the hands of man)

But this advocacy of mine attempts to be honest. The idea DID come to me, by which carbon dioxide COULD be a cause of warming. This would be if the carbon dioxide would SINK to low elevations according to its greater DENSITY.

The reason that hot air balloons can rise is in the fact that the air is heated, and heated air is less dense. ( That pesky PV=nRT equation again.) Carbon dioxide has more mass per volume, which makes it more dense. The best places to measure a co2 density phenomenon is in lower elevations, and make a comparison with higher elevations. Not sure how measure co2 these days, but it seems that I recall that measurements were taken on the Hawaii islands at the top of a mountain. That doesn't make sense if my hypothesis is correct.

They claim to be worried about melting glaciers. Not likely at higher elevations, compadre. Most carbon dioxide would be at sea level, if my hypothesis is correct. The water is already melted there, and wouldn't be able to flood anywhere.

If you wanted to scare the crap out of people, prove this hypothesis. We would smother ourselves before we'd flood the planet. Especially if you are the beach, amigos.

AGW post 117

This may not be persuasive to people, and even if it was, it may not make any difference anyway. But what the heck? So here's another "AGW is bunk" type of post for your... whatever...

I was curious about the mass of the atmosphere and of the oceans. From what I can gather, it looks like the oceans outweigh the atmosphere by a factor of 250. Much is made about carbon, but water vapor is more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. I can't back up my source for that, though. Call it lazy of me, but I think it is true. But it won't make any difference to these people anyway. I know water will retain heat. I used to spend a lot of time in swimming pools. By the end of the day, and after sundown, the water will be hot on a summer day. The point is that water will retain heat, and is easily confirmed by anybody who would be curious enough to check it out.

There is also 20 times more water vapor than carbon dioxide. It is more of a greenhouse gas, and it is far more abundant. What we do, even if carbon dioxide was much of a factor ( which I don't believe ) isn't going to compare with what is already there. In short, we aren't much of a factor in the climate in a system this large.

The numbers don't lie. The facts don't lie. You can take the red pill, and see things as they true are--- or take the blue pill and believe whatever you want to believe. Just like in the movie.

There was a scene in that movie when a guy betrayed because he could get an advantage for himself. In a nutshell, that is what AGW politics is all about. It is just a group of people seeking to advantage themselves at others expense.

AGW is bunk.

AGW post number 116

It is about mass, you people. There is no mass in gases, because a gas will not hold its shape. Only a sealed container, or the force of gravity across a large mass will do that. This happens in planetary systems, like Earth's.

Stars are born that way. When enough gas occupies a portion of space, it gravitates toward itself creating the star. The INCREASED temperature in a DECREASING volume, causes the gas temperature to rise to extreme highs. Once the temperature gets hot enough, it will cause fusion. A star is born.

In order to have this come about, there has to be something that contains the gas. This would be gravity. Or in the case of a greenhouse, the building will contain the gas. The gas, when left its own devices, will disperse in all directions, and LOSE ITS HEAT.

Incidentally, that is how air conditioning systems work. It relies upon this property to disperse heat from one place, and move it to another. Your automobile's internal combustion engine could not work without this property. The expanding gases from the ignition of a fuel/air mixture, will be sufficient to push down the piston, which will do work. The hot gases are expelled from the cylinder and out the exhaust pipe. Along its journey toward the end of the tailpipe, the temperature DECREASES. You know that is true by measuring the temperature at the point of combustion versus the temperature at the exhaust. Try it and see. But don't touch the exhaust manifold where the gases are very hot. It will burn yourself.

If you turn off the engine, and measure its temperature over a period of time, you will find that it takes awhile for it to cool down. The engine gets plenty hot. But unlike gases, the solid shape will RETAIN its heat.

For this reason alone, AGW is total and complete bunk.

AGW post number 115

 

This could be number 15 in the series. Not really an accurate count.

This one is a simple idea. The idea comes from the gas law, which shows that it is mass that must determine heat retention. You see, the common refrain from these warmist types is that it is the type of gas that determines heat retention. It is the heat retention that causes the AGW, supposedly.

It may have been mentioned before in this series, so pardon the repetition. Solid materials, in the solid phase, as opposed to the gaseous phase, that holds heat best. No gas can hold the heat, and this requires no PHD to observe the phenomenon. Note for yourself that things that get hot stay hot, when they are solids. But gases disperse in a short amount of time.

Gases disperse because of the nature of gases. It is reflected in the gas law equation PV=nrt; where P =pressure, V= volume, n=number of moles ( molecules ), r is a constant, and t= temp. This will model a gaseous system. Thus, one mole of any gas is 22.4 liters at standard temperature and pressure. Increasing pressure will affect the other variables in the equation so as to maintain balance. V would have to decrease. Otherwise, the right side of the equation must also increase. Let's substitute some numbers. If P=1, V=1, n=1, and t=1 ( not a realistic scenario, but demonstrates the math), and if P increase to 2, then v must decrease to 1/2 in order to keep the balance. Otherwise, the temperature must increase to 2 as well. ( let r=1 too). Just showing how the numbers affect each other.

Back to realism here. Let's say you increase the number of molecules ( or moles). Lets say you double it. What does that do? All things equal on one side must result in the other side doubling as well. Pressure or volume must increase proportionally.

Doubling n increases the mass of the system. Mass must increase pressure of volume in order to keep the balance. If volume is the same, then pressure must increase; and vice versa. Since the number of molecules determines the volume or pressure, then it is all related to the amount of mass present. All gases behave the same way. One mole of any gas will always equal the atomic weight of the molecules. It will also equal the 22.4 liters at standard temperature and pressure. Keeping it at standard temperature and pressure must increase the volume, if n is doubled.

In a planetary system, like Earth's, the volume is likely to be fairly constant because of gravity. It is gravity which holds the atmosphere in place. The other variable, which is pressure, must go up if temperature does. Or if one variable changes. It is likely that the number of moles is unlikely to change. Only the composition of the atmosphere is likely to change. Thus oxygen could be replaced by carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is only slightly "heavier" than oxygen. It won't change it enough to cause the effects that are being claimed for it. It never could.

For example, you could never reproduce Venus on Earth because you'd have to increase the number of molecules. Where are you going to get the molecules? Burning fossil fuels only replaces oxygen with carbon dioxide. It doesn't change the number of molecules. Mass is only slightly changed. Slight changes aren't going to make that big of a difference, but that is what is being claimed.

Consequently, AGW is bunk.

AGW is just another hoax

So Algore was out there comparing "deniers" to the cops at the latest bleeding heart festival in Uvalde. Yeah, and I know that might get some people upset to use that kind of language, but SCREW IT. They want kids to die. The NEED kids to die. Otherwise they'd do something constructive about it, which they never do. Instead, they do the very thing that won't work. That's because when it all happens again, they can use it for politics. It'll never end because they need these things to happen in order to make themselves relevant.

When it comes to the poltical left, nothing is what it is presented to be. If they claim to be for school safety, that means they don't care. If they claim to be for public health, they don't care. They just use these events for political power. That is all that matters to these people. The lockdowns and the masks weren't about public health. It was about political power.

So when Algore talks about Uvalde, he doesn't care about the kids getting harmed. He doesn't care about AGW either. It's just about the politics.

There are so many hoaxes anymore that it is a wonder that anybody believes anything these people say about anything. But of course. It isn't about truth. It is about power.

Time and time again, I can verify for my own satisfaction that there's no AGW at all. We couldn't do it if we wanted to. If there's a variation in the climate, it is only because there's ALWAYS been a variation, and always will be.

Carbon dioxide cannot trap heat. It is impossible. It is a fake.

It must be the case that these people believe these fairy tales because they want to. There's no way anybody can actually believe this by looking at it honestly.