Occupy Wall Street and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse represent the destructive and chaotic forces which include war, pestilence, famine, and death. According to the bible these forces are unleashed by Satan, but history has shown that this kind of evil can be unleashed by individuals and nations. War can alter perceptions and make people see enemies where none exist, pestilence can create and transport human diseases, famine can affect human urges and addictions, and death is the ultimate outcome when war, famine, and pestilence are combined.

The war according the Occupy Wall Street movement is against the wealthy and Wall Street. They call it class warfare, a battle between the rich and poor. This has been the rallying call of both the liberal and media propaganda machines for decades. They have brainwashed the naïve masses into believing there is a war where none exists. The progressive message has been heard and the masses have mobilized and set up battlefields across the country to fight for their Holy Grail: the illusion they can freeload off the wealth of others. In fact, the war is not over class warfare, but it is a battle over responsibility versus irresponsibility; over accountability versus unaccountability; over productive versus unproductive; and over greed versus charity. In reality, the battle pits local businesses, police, and citizens against the Occupy Wall Street movement. In fact, each of the Occupy Movement venues across the country is beginning to resemble a war zone. Yet, most of the Occupiers claim they are peaceful and they are against any form of war. They are truly hypocrites.

It has taken only four to six weeks for pestilence and disease outbreaks to show its ugly face in most Occupied venues. This is exactly what happens when people live in close proximity and they live like animals. Trash has piled up, mold has formed on wet cardboard signs and shanties, public urination has soiled the grounds, portable toilets are overflowing with feces, wastewater from portable showers has soiled the grounds, and poor food storage and handling has tainted the food supply and have turned these grounds into a petri dish of disease bacteria. The grass and trees in many park venues have started to die. This has led to a tuberculosis outbreak in Atlanta. Poor food storage and handling led to a rat infestation in Oakland. Hypothermia has developed in Denver. Respiratory illnesses are rampant in New York – called Zuccotti lung. Organizers of the movement were obviously oblivious to sanitation and weather effects of prolonged protests (i.e. they started the movement just before the winter months which is obviously not the best time to start a war).

Famine, in terms of a food shortage has yet to stricken those of the Occupy Wall Street movement because organizers are well funded. In fact, many homeless have joined the ranks of the movement solely to get free food, which has caused internal conflicts and a splintering among the rank and file of the movement. Apparently, as irony would have it, Occupy protestors have taken issue with food freeloaders. But illness will continue to stricken the protestors as increased unsanitary conditions continue to taint both the water and food supply. This may be the most common and effective way to transport illness and disease such as gastritis or botulism. In fact, many of the occupiers will spread diseases through the sharing of addictive vices or substances, such as sex, cigarettes, marijuana, hypodermic needles, and alcoholic beverages.

Death and violent crimes have started to takes its toll. First, over a dozen rapes and assaults have taken place at various locations across the country. Local businesses have been robbed, defaced, and destroyed with Molotov cocktails. Now, death is becoming a commonplace for Occupiers with three just this past week alone in Burlington Vermont, Salt Lake City Utah, and Oakland California where the violence has been the worst. Many city Mayors (Portland, Burbank, Oakland, and Salt Lake City) have seen enough and are ordering protests to end.

Yes, Lucifer is showing his ugly face with the Occupy Wall Street Movement. This is exactly what evil looks like.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

Law Enforcement Failed Abused Youths, Not Penn State

The Penn State scandal hits home for two reasons, first I graduated from Penn State. And for the first time in my life I am embarrassed and ashamed to admit that I went to the institution. The whole situation makes me sick to my stomach and leaves a bitter pill to swallow. I have no issue with how the Board of Trustees acted by firing anyone who knew of the sex abuse. A university, like a corporation, must rebrand itself and eliminate any links to a scandal – even if the judicial process has not played out. Otherwise the media will constantly place Penn State under a microscope during the entire judicial process further tainting and ruining their image. I was a proud Penn State alum and most proud of the fact that ethics and education came first. Up to this point in time, Penn State is the only Division I program to have never received an NCAA sanction against it for ANY sport. This is quite an accomplishment, but when a scandal occurs which hurts children, there is public outrage and rightfully so. Joe Paterno is and was a good man. Unfortunately, this sex scandal will overshadow all the good Joe did in his lifetime dedicated to college football and education (the media coverers more stories that are bad in nature than good ones). Joe’s legacy was not about having the most college wins in NCAA history, it was about ethics and doing what was right. His salary was modest, but his donations back to the university and charities were massive. Joe made a costly mistake and it will tarnish him forever. It is an unfortunate situation for everyone involved.

The second reason the Penn State scandal hits home is because I too was abused. But I was lucky, I was merely physically abused and I will take the broken bones over even the thought of being sexually abused. My mother would call for my help when my stepfather was abusing her, but when the dust settled and authorities showed up – my mother and the police would take the side of the inebriated man who was twice my size. Times have changed and authorities are not always that quick to take the side of the adult, but in many aspects society remains unchanged when it comes to child abuse, especially when it comes to law enforcement. Nothing angered me more about the Penn State story than when Pennsylvania law enforcement workers such as the Attorney General and police officials publically stated that Joe Paterno and those involved “did not do enough”. How’s that for irony, Joe Paterno followed the law and the people who write and enforce the laws were not satisfied. What’s worse, these same law enforcement officials have done nothing to lobby for stricter and better laws to help protect our youth. If law enforcement does not like the law, change it! Instead, law enforcement decided to blame their shortcomings on someone who merely followed the laws they wrote. Hence, Pennsylvania law enforcement is where the blame lies; not Joe Paterno – he is merely a scapegoat. Law enforcement is the entity that “is not doing enough!” when it comes to child abuse.

The accused, Jerry Sandusky, has already come out saying he too was abused as a youth. I believe him; many abused youths turn into the monsters that abused them. I, like my stepfather, became an angry alcoholic who frequently went to bars looking for fights. I never hit women or youths, but I did hit innocent people. I feared I was becoming my stepfather, and finally turned my life around. Once I quit drinking the anger and violent tendencies subsided. I am still angry, but I do not act on that anger. This is another major fundamental issue with the laws of our society, we are more focused on rehabilitating monsters but we do very little to help rehabilitate victims of crimes. And what’s worse, our court system is designed to help protect child predators. Judges hand out lenient sentences and allow for defenses that protect predators by making them look like the victims. Sandusky will probably plead some sort of mental anguish, but what happen to him during his youth does not give him any right to be a predator and hurt children.

Predators that attack women and children are very common. There is most likely one of these predators within a stone’s throw from your home. What have you done to stop this? Have you lobbied for tougher laws against predators? Probably not, which means you are just culpable as Joe Paterno. You, like Joe, did not break the law, but turned a blind eye to the situation. However, I solely place the blame of the Penn State situation on our law enforcement system because laws and sentences are much too lenient for child and spousal predators. This needs to change, not finding innocent scapegoats who were merely in the wrong place at the wrong time.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

A Commonsense Solution to CO2 (Part IV)

After 3 blogs about commonsense ways to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) in our atmosphere, it is time to breakdown how much CO2 each individual contributes to the air we breathe. No, I do not believe manmade CO2 is the cause for warmer temperatures, but I do believe too much CO2 can be a health risk.

Today, our atmospheric CO2 saturation level is at 391 parts per million (ppm) – this is measured at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. That means the saturation level is at about 0.04% in the air we breathe. Carbon Dioxide is lethal, but that does not happen until levels go over 5%. At a 1% saturation level many individuals can start to feel the effects of CO2 such as lightheadedness. Carbon Dioxide concentration levels have gone up from around 310 ppm in 1960 to our current level of 390 ppm over a 50 year time period. Thus, the concentration of CO2 has on average increased by 1.6 ppm per year. Over the past 10 years the concentration level of CO2 has gone up by about 2.1 ppm every year. This makes sense because global population numbers and CO2 concentration levels are directly proportional.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has an online calculator so each individual can compute their CO2 emissions. In other words, this calculator reveals your carbon footprint. This site is located at: http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ind_calculator.html. Here is breakdown of CO2 emissions that each individual is capable of releasing into the atmosphere each year:

• The energy to produce one Kilowatt-Hour of electricity equates to 2 pounds (lbs.) of CO2 emissions.
• The energy to produce one Thousand Cubic Foot of natural gas equates to 12 lbs. of CO2 emissions.
• One gallon of propane equates to 12 lbs. of CO2 emissions.
• One gallon of oil or gas equates to 20 lbs. of CO2 emissions.
• The average human emits about 2 lbs. of CO2 per day.

The EPA assumes that the average driver will use about 12 gallons of gas per month and; they will spend 35 dollars a month on natural gas and or; 70 dollars per month on electricity and or; 45 dollars per month on oil and or; 40 dollars per month on propane to heat and cool their homes. The EPA calculator will give individuals credit for recycling their garbage. When all of this is summed up each person will spew about 20,775 lbs. of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. This does include the amount of CO2 each person emits by simply breathing. Breathing amounts to about 5% of the total CO2 we emit each year. My wife and I (combined) emit a total of 15,000 lbs. of CO2 yearly. That is about 75% of what an average person would emit.

Remember, there are 6.6 billion people in the world, and although people around the globe emit much less than the average American, this means there are literally trillions of tons of CO2 being emitting yearly into the air we breathe. These are staggering numbers.

So what is the point of all these statistics? Even if the industrialized world met its climate change objectives by reducing CO2 emissions by 75% by 2050, it still means there will be trillions of tons of CO2 being released into our atmosphere. Even if the world was 100% green by 2050, the 8 billion people (not including animals that also emit CO2) would still emit trillions of tons of CO2 into our atmosphere. This is why cap and trade and liberal energy policies will never solve the CO2 problem. It may slow the increase of CO2 concentration levels in our atmosphere, but this figure will always be on the rise. This is why we need to embrace commonsense techniques being implemented by Lackner and Keith.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

A Commonsense Solution to CO2 (Part III)

There is reason to be hopeful because Klaus Lackner is not the only person who is investigating a commonsense solution to carbon dioxide emissions (CO2). University of Calgary climate change scientist, David Keith, is also working on his version of a CO2 scrubber. Keith has built a small model of his CO2 scrubber that has shown it is possible to remove trace amounts of CO2 from the air any time and at any place on the planet.

Keith defines the difference between carbon capture and storage (CCS) and his approach that is called air capture. CCS is the method being implemented at coal refineries to make clean coal energy. A CCS system is installed at a coal refinery that captures CO2 and then pumps the CO2 underground where it can be stored. An air capture system on the other hand can be used anywhere, not just at a coal refinery. In other words, CO2 can be filtered in areas with both large and small densities of CO2 in the air.

Keith’s method can capture a ton of CO2 emissions using a mere 100 kilowatt hours of electricity. They were able to remove 20 tons of CO2 using a mere meter of scrubbing material in one year. This is more than enough to offset the CO2 produced by one person. Keith’s method is both cost and energy effective. The challenge will be making a larger commercial version of his model that can remove billions of tons of CO2. This is down the road, and he admits it will not be easy, but it is feasible.

Years ago, I envisioned a biodegradable CO2 scrubber that can be dropped from a plane and absorb massive amounts of CO2 before falling harmlessly to the ground as a hydrocarbon. At this point, the biodegradable scrubber would be naturally recycled into our lands and waters. My plan included using a charcoal type material. Charcoal is a carbon based material that is very porous and therefore, has a lot of surface area to absorb waste. One gram of charcoal has a surface area equivalent to one tenth the size of a football field! Using a heat process, base compounds such as sodium hydroxide (NaOH – baking soda), potassium hydroxide (KOH), and lithium hydroxide (LiOH) can be attached to the charcoal material. Another common base that can be used to filter CO2 is soda lime (75%- Ca(OH)2; 20% - H2O; 3% - NaOH; 2% - KOH). Here are typical reactions when CO2 encounters these bases:

2LiOH + CO2 => Li2CO3 + H2O (The reaction of 2 lithium hydroxide molecules with one carbon dioxide yields lithium carbonate plus water)

2NaOH + CO2 => Na2CO3 + H2O (The reaction of 2 sodium hydroxide molecules with one carbon dioxide yields sodium carbonate plus water)

2KOH + CO2 => K2CO3 + H2O (The reaction of 2 potassium hydroxide molecules with one carbon dioxide yields potassium carbonate plus water)

Ca(OH)2 + CO2 => CaCO3 + H2O (The reaction of soda lime with carbon dioxide yields calcium carbonate plus water)

Maybe I was misguided because there are some flaws with my proposal. First, this method requires a lot of energy to create the filter and secondly, there is no guarantee when the charcoal compound disintegrates that it would not spew the CO2 back into the atmosphere. But it took this type of thinking for me to search for logical solutions to reduce CO2 in our atmosphere - solutions that would destroy our economy and our way of living. This led directly to me finding the innovative work of both Lackner and Keith. Here are links to their studies:

http://www.physorg.com/news141915261.html

http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/articles/view/2523

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

A Commonsense Solution to CO2 (Part II)

I have been preaching for years that the solution to cut CO2 emissions should not to disturb the current global economy. This requires innovative and creative outside the box thinking, which politicians and most energy scientists obviously lack. Even if CO2 is not causing climate change, we can all agree it is a pollutant that is harmful to our health. After all, CO2 is a deadly gas. After years of scanning for a solution, I have finally come across a person who has the right idea when it comes to solving the CO2 problem in our atmosphere. Physicist, Klaus Lackner, at Columbia University is creating a way to “Suck CO2” out of the air using “CO2 scrubber” technology. A CO2 scrubber filters CO2 directly out of the air we breathe. The theory using CO2 scrubbers already exists and has been incorporated in submarine and space shuttle technology. Anyone who has seen “Apollo 13” understands the importance of CO2 scrubbers in space. However, the trick is developing a CO2 scrubber that is not cost prohibitive. In fact, large CO2 scrubbing stations could consume a large amount of power and therefore, should be powered by low cost renewable energy such as hydropower. The key to Lackner’s technology is that he has developed a plastic sponge that absorbs CO2 rapidly, but at the same time, the CO2 is easily cleaned from the filter using water in a vacuum chamber. Hence, Lackner’s CO2 scrubber uses much less power to absorb and clean the CO2 from the filter than earlier forms of the technology. The next step in the process is the hardest to implement – how to dispose of the extracted CO2? The most likely solution is to keep the CO2 in a liquid form and pump under the earth’s surface where the CO2 can be absorbed by rocks. This is the same technology being investigated by “clean coal” power plants. They too want to capture harmful CO2 and then dispose of it deep into the earth’s crust. But there is still plenty of concern as to whether or not the CO2 will remain underground without eventually leaking back into the earth’s atmosphere. Another option is to add hydrogen to the CO2 and convert it back to liquid hydrocarbons. Here is some information on Klaus Lackner: http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/articles/view/2523 A CO2 scrubbing station would consist of a motor to push wind through the filter. Once the filter is saturated with CO2, it is lowered into a vacuum and rinsed with water. The filter then returns to its operating state, meanwhile the CO2 is separated from the water, compressed into a liquid and pumped underground. The genius of the Lackner solution to filter and dispose of CO2 emissions is it does not require a change to our lifestyles or to our economy. We can continue to use less expensive coal and fossil fuel sources of energy until renewable energies can be produced at an acceptable cost level. And Lackner’s CO2 scrubber will also remove CO2 emissions generated from hydrocarbon life forms (humans and animals). And better yet, Lackner’s CO2 scrubber will eliminate CO2 emissions that currently exist in our atmosphere from nearly two centuries of industrial pollution. Thus, the use of CO2 scrubbers could theoretically lower the current level (390 parts per million) of CO2 in our atmosphere. This is something the liberal green energy agenda not only fails to accomplish; they do not want Lackner’s idea to ruin their plan of progressive power and wealth. My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

A Commonsense Solution to CO2 (Part I)

The Democrats and Obama want to pass their “green” energy plan for America. It consists of many phases including spending billions to upgrade the national power grid infrastructure to be a “smart” power grid. Some “smart” grid updates are indeed needed to protect the power grid from natural and manmade disasters. However, the “smart” grid upgrade includes spending billions to expand our grid to accommodate renewable energy power stations. This is an expensive task because renewable energy power plants are generally located far away from the current power grid infrastructure. After all, wind corridors and deserts are not generally in highly populated areas. The other aspect of the progressive green energy plan includes taxing businesses for their carbon emissions (CO2). Let’s make no bones about the Democrats green energy plan agenda – its sole purpose is to combat climate change and not to make energy more abundant and affordable or even to make our power grid safer. The result of the liberal “green” energy plan for America: Energy costs will at least double (most likely triple or go even higher) for every individual and corporation in America. Renewable energies such as solar and wind are 3 to 5 times more expensive to manufacture one kilowatt-hour of energy than coal, nuclear, or fossil fuel based energies. And obviously, taxing corporate carbon emissions will raise the costs for businesses to manufacture products. This combination of changes in the liberal green energy plan will have a cataclysmic effect on the U.S. economy. It will force corporations to cut jobs or send them overseas. It will cut consumer spending by 3 percent and therefore, shrink the economy by the same amount. Yes, there will be new green jobs created, but if the U.S. plan mimics the Spain green energy plan then 2 jobs will leave the economy for every green job that is created. Finally, a green energy plan will also create a 5 trillion dollar financial bubble, which will eventually burst, like every financial bubble. The result will be another devastating recession. However, the left would do anything to strengthen the monetary value of individuals, groups, and corporations that support the green movement. For instance, this will make Al Gore and progressive leaning corporations such as General Electric billions in profits. Of course a good percentage of those profits will line the wallets of liberal politician. The liberal green energy plan displays not only a lack of simple commonsense, but it is vastly destructive at the same time. The fundamental flaw with misguided global warming alarmists answer to our CO2 problem is that there is not enough money on the planet to convert all current energy sources around the globe to a carbon free footprint. Besides, there is no such thing as a carbon free footprint as long as carbon emitting life forms exist on our planet. Therefore, the Democrats plan will never completely combat carbon emissions, but it will destroy our economy. In fact, the Democrats green energy plan fails to reduce the level of CO2 in our atmosphere; it only attempts to slow the growth of CO2. For example, today it is estimated the atmosphere is saturated with 390 parts per million of CO2. Under the Democrats plan, this number will still continue to grow, but hopefully at a slower rate. My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)