The Age Of Enlightenment

Progressives are progressing us headlong into a new Dark Ages. The have recognized the ancient wisdom that sacrifice is needed to control the climate.


Progressives tell us that a Paris agreement is needed to stop 41 degrees warming


Don’t let Paris attacks stop COP21 climate change deal, Obama urges | Environment | The Guardian

Progressives have recognized the evils of Christianity, and have invited millions of like minded people into the west.


About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to The Age Of Enlightenment

  1. Martin Smith says:

    Increasingly, your blog posts don’t deserve a response.

    • Human sacrifice and an Alberta carbon tax have exactly the same effect on the climate – zero. They are ripping the heart out of Alberta’s economy.

      You need to pull your head out.

      • Martin Smith says:

        There is no human sacrifice in Alberta, and if Alberta implements a carbon tax, it is a small step toward incentivising capitalism to speed up the conversion away from fossil fuels to renewable energy and 4th generation nuclear.

        [SG : Tens of thousands of poor and elderly die in the UK every winter, because they can’t afford heat. Greens have made far more human sacrifices than Mayans]

        • Latitude says:

          That would be like starving to death…when the frig and pantry are full of food.

        • Martin Smith says:

          Non sequitur, Lat.

        • Latitude says:

          You like that word a lot, don’t you?

          Sorry, didn’t mean for it to be over your head…again

        • Gail Combs says:

          I really really would like to stick Martin and his like minded Useful Idiots in a ‘country’ with NOTHING but GREEN ENERGY, aka Solar and wind. NO nuclear or CO2 producing power allowed.

          I think living in such a country for an entire year is the only way to pound reality into their thick skulls.

          And Martin spare me the ‘new technology’ bullshit. ‘Green energy’ is archaic!

          Sail boats were around as early as 5,000 B.C. and the Persians used wind to pump water and grind grain between 500 and 900 B.C. It was used in the USA up until recently to fill livestock water tanks but was abandoned because diesel engines are cheaper and a heck of a lot less work and more reliable.

          In the year 1767 a Swiss scientist named Horace- Benedict de Saussure created the first solar collector and in 1954 Daryl Chapin, Calvin Fuller, and Gerald Pearson develop the silicon photovoltaic (PV) cell at Bell Labs.

          Parthian Battery. A clay jar of a prehistoric battery holds an iron rod surrounded by a copper cylinder. When filled with vinegar or electrolytic solution, the jar produces 1.1 to 2 volts. (ca. 250 BC) In 1744, Ewald Georg von Kleist, developed the Leyden jar that stored static charge in a glass jar. Volta came up with what we think of as the electric battery in 1796.

          The first documented use of watermills was in the first century BC.

          Ripping of the Rubes with scams is old too.

          “There’s a sucker born every minute.”
          David Hannum, July 1908 issue of the journal of Profitable Advertising

        • Martin Smith says:

          No they don’t.

        • DavidS says:

          The money from the tax will not go to energy efficiency or anything like that. It will go to the provincial debt, i.e. straight to the banks. This tax is just a further extension of the poor and middle class being used as tax slaves for the large banks. No one would normally go along with it but if sold as “for the earth”, people fall for it (as you perhaps have, although I suspect you are more cynical than that).

        • catweazle666 says:

          Martin Smith says: “No they don’t.

          Another flat out disprovable lie.

          The scandal of Britain’s fuel poverty deaths

          Thousands of people die each winter in the UK as a result of being unable to heat their homes. Are we doing enough to help them?

          That’s from the Guardian – the last possible paper you can accuse of being Right wing propaganda.

          What a truly vile, nasty, mendacious, abusive little creep you are.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Cat, Martin has not made one comment that is not provably wrong.

          Ignorance is all that the cretinous little Goreboy has.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Goreboy, your faceplant page says you are in Oslo.

          I DARE you to turn off all your fossil fuel fired heating for a week, at home and at work.

          But you won’t will you.. because you a piece of hypocritical scum.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Oh wait there, Norway relies almost totally on Hydro doesn’t it…….

          ….. but also rely on the massive export of North Sea oil to exist economically.

          So, how about you get off your wasted butt and start campaigning for the cessation of all North Sea oil exports. I’m sure the greenies would luv you. !!

      • sfx2020 says:


        You might enjoy this

        Stanford researchers uncover patterns in how scientists lie about their data

        • sfx2020 says:

          The researchers say that scientists might commit data fraud for a variety of reasons. Previous research points to a “publish or perish” mentality that may motivate researchers to manipulate their findings or fake studies altogether.

        • Gail Combs says:

          A nice addition to my Scientific Fraud collection.

          In May 1, 1980 J. Scott Armstrong of University of Pennsylvania published Bafflegab Pays It is a nice companion piece.

          From the Philadelphia Inquirer, March 23, 1982.
          Plain Prose: It’s Seldom Seen in Journals
          Written by Dick Pothier

          If you want to publish an article in some scientific or medical journal, here is some unusual advice from Scott Armstrong, a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School: Choose an unimportant topic. Agree with existing beliefs. Use convoluted methods. Withhold some of your data. And write the whole thing in stilted, obtuse prose.

          Armstrong, who is the editor of a new research publication called the Journal of Forecasting, offered the advice in a serious, scholarly article last month in the journal’s first issue. He said yesterday that he had studied the publication process in research journals for years.

          “Although these rules clearly run counter to the goal of contributing to scientific knowledge — the professed goal of academic journals — they do increase a paper’s chance of being published,” Armstrong said.

          “Some readers may feel that the suggestions here … are extreme,” he wrote in his article. “However, they provide a description of many papers published in the social sciences…. It is not by accident that intelligent and successful scientists produce such work.” Armstrong surveyed dozens of recent studies on how articles in such journals get published, and the result, he said, “was rather depressing, if our job is to get that research information out and have the readers benefit from it.”

          In one study, Armstrong said, academics reading articles in scientific journals rated the authors’ competence higher when the writing was less intelligible than when it was clear.

          In another study, Armstrong said, research papers were mailed to a sampling of dozens of researchers. Half the scientists received a paper that described an experiment confirming existing beliefs; the other half received a paper describing an identical experiment but with a different conclusion that challenged the consensus.

          Although the methods used in the two sets of papers were identical, the scientists surveyed generally approved of the procedures used in the papers that confirmed existing beliefs and generally disapproved of the same methods when they were used to contradict what most scientists believed, Armstrong said.

          “Papers with surprising results are especially important for adding significantly to what is known. Presumably, the editors of journals want to publish important papers,” Armstrong said. “On the other hand, they are concerned that the journal might look foolish — and so they reject many of the important papers.”

          For young academics who wish to be published in such journals, Armstrong said, “the factors that would seem to be a deadly combination would be choosing an important problem and obtaining surprising results.”

          Other studies, Armstrong said, indicate that obscure writing helps those who have little to say. And having little to say may also be an advantage, especially if the author withholds some significant data. “This will allow the researcher to continue publishing slightly different versions of the same research,” which Armstrong says is a common practice…..

        • Billy Liar says:

          Here’s another one along similar lines. A list of expressions used in papers where the authors failed to achieve statistical significance:

    • gator69 says:

      Increasingly, the population of the world says that climate change doesn’t deserve a response…

      (From the United Nations “MY World” initiative)

    • Andy DC says:

      Increasingly, you comments don’t deserve to be published. Especially if all you can do is regugitate altered data that has a clear warm bias.

    • Stewart Pid says:

      Martin if you think a response is not warranted then please follow your own advice and don’t post anymore of your nitwit, greentard comments!!

    • AndyG55 says:

      Martin the Goreboy is the very last piece of human excrement that should be making comments like that.

      The only reason to ever respond to his comments is to make sure his abject ignorance is corrected.

    • dmmcmah says:

      Claiming a 41 degree rise in temperature is complete crap. As the time approaches for this stupid conference its amazing the level of lying they’re willing to go to in order to get support for any treaty that comes out of this.

      • AndyG55 says:

        Pardon their ignorance…….. They are the gruniad, after all. 😉

        Even suggesting 5ºC rise is moronically stupid as we are dipping into a cooling period…

        ….but to then convert that rise using the Cº to Fº conversion formula is ignorant stupidity to the max. 🙂

        A 5ºC rise is equivalent to a 9ºF rise and a 2ºC rise is equivalent to a 3.8ºF rise

  2. Steve Case says:

    Increasingly world events other than so-called “Climate Change” need to be addressed.

  3. Henry P says:

    Steven Goddard
    Progressives have recognized the evils of Christianity, and have invited millions of like minded people into the west.

    Henry says
    Could somebody enlighten me here? Christianity is good.

  4. I. Lou Minotti says:

    “Progressives have recognized the evils of Christianity, and have invited millions of like-minded people into the west.”

    As if we didn’t have enough of these third world, bloodthirsty animals residing among us already!?

    We need a new hashtag. How about this: #Pastors’InnocentWivesLivesMatter

    • Gail Combs says:

      (Pope whispers violence is wrong…)

      • Henry P says:

        One of the biggest errors in human history was slavery and although sometimes condoned or allowed by the various religions in the past,

        slavery was never taught or instituted as a way of life by any particular religion. Some simple research, for example in American history,

        will show that it was pure economics that was the root cause of the error of slavery.

        Note that it was initially (mainly) Christian men and women both in England and the USA that stood up against slavery and ultimately succeeded in getting it abolished.

        The eugenic laws that Hitler put into place in Germany in the forties were based on “science”. It allowed the Germans to discriminate against and even terminate the lives of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, even paraplegics. Will we ever forget Joseph Mengele and his experiments? During the period before the war, Hendrik Verwoerd studied this nonsense in Germany and as a result we in South Africa got stuck here with the error of apartheid.

        Again it was the Christians in the USA, Canada, Australia and elsewhere in the world who stood up against Hitler and they prayed and asked their governments to bring in armies to fight Hitler.Many of them sacrificed their own lives so we might be free.

        Can I ask: in the above simple examples of human error: was it not economics and pseudo psychology/science that were the culprits of the mess and was not Christianity instrumental in bringing an end to these horrors?

        • Gail Combs says:


          In Politics, Aristotle wrote that if “the shuttle would then weave, and the lyre play of itself; nor would the architect want servants, or the master slaves.”

          It is often paraphrased “When looms weave by themselves human’s slavery will end.” (Buckingham describing automation)

          As a friend told his teacher when asked at school “who freed the slaves” It was James Watt not Lincoln. James Watt is the one who invented the first practical cost-effectiven steam engines. Combined with other technology within fifty years it made slaves in the North much less useful as factories became more and more automated during the first Industrial Revolution. Only in the South where mindless hand labor was still required on farms did slavery ‘make sense’

          We actually had a second ‘freeing of slaves’ thanks to modern medicine and modern conveniences. No longer are women tied to the house birthing baby after baby. Now we have the option of getting an education and joining the workforce since we only need to birth 2 or 3 kids not a dozen and we are not tied to back breaking housework. In an hour or two we can do what our great grandmas took all day to do. (Try beating a rug instead of vacuuming, canning food instead of tossing prepackaged into the freezer or washing heavy clothes by hand.)

          Therefore CAGW/ ‘Green Energy’ and Christiana Figueres ‘change in the economic model’** is in reality a return to the days of slavery/serfdom.

          “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution… democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China is the best model.” — Christiana Figueres, disciple of Al Gore, and Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention

        • Jason Calley says:

          Bucky Fuller loved to point out that with modern technology, the energy that we use is our allotment of “energy slaves.” A strong human can output maybe half a horsepower for a substantial period. If your car has 150 horsepower, then your car is the equivalent of 300 “energy slaves.” Additionally, the upkeep on one auto is considerably less than the upkeep on 300 human slaves.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Even simple things like mowing the lawn with a riding mover vs a sythe; cutting down a tree with a chainsaw vs a hand saw; moving 55 feet (height) off Pemberton Hill and filling in eight acres about 14 feet deep of the Backbay saltwater swamp using 250 men and 126 ox carts in five months. Of course it would still take that long with Mass DPW using men with loaders and dump trucks.

        • No. Nothing in the teachings of Jesus says slavery is wrong. HL Mencken offered a cash reward for gainsaying that and it went unclaimed. Religion is the Chinese footbinding of human minds, and the brainwashing only works on the young. Never do undamaged adult christians or mohammedans convert one another to switch jihads for crusades.

        • gator69 says:

          One must be careful when translating ancient texts into modern language. “Slaves” that the Bible discusses were usually “servants” who sold themselves into bondage to wealthy men in order to provide for their families, not much different than working for a corporation today. What we call slavery today was called “man stealing” in Biblical times, and was considered a sin.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey oiltranslator! I admit that I am not a big fan of Ayn Rand, but if you have not read her essay on comprachicos, it is well worth a look.

      • I. Lou Minotti says:

        Leave it to one of the “Vicars” of Christ to screw everything up.

        • I. Lou Minotti says:

          And Roman Catholic “charity” is also doing it’s damnest to undermine the Judeo-Christian fabric of America:

          Lest we forget, Catholic Charities was instrumental in the resettling of many “peaceful” Muslims to the US during the Bosnia-Herzegovena conflict under the watchful eye of one William Jefferson Clinton. It was done at taxpayer expense (i.e., the redistribution of America’s wealth).

  5. Henry P says:

    Hi Lou

    you might like this site?

  6. Henry P says:

    I was mocking you…
    But yes, God did come to earth as one of us and lived a life showing us what our Creator is like. Indeed, His love for us can be compared with the love of an earthly parent for his child. Despite our mistakes, His love for us is unconditional. Unreasonably so, it seems. Should we have lived during His time here on earth, I am sure many of us would have been exactly like one of His disciples: e.g. not being prepared to do any of the dirty jobs (wash feet), dropping your friend when they were at their worst time in need on earth (Simon Peter & others), and not having any faith whatsoever when it really mattered (Thomas & others). In the end, He was condemned to die by crucifixion, suffering the worst kind of pain anyone of us could possibly endure….
    Lastly, incredibly so, it seems, seeing as that we are talking about “pictures” and “seeing God”, it appears He did decide to leave us with an actual image of Himself. Somehow, He reckoned that we needed to have this. Here you can examine Him.
    The Shroud of Turin is a centuries old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man. Is it really the cloth that wrapped His crucified body, or is it simply a medieval forgery, a hoax perpetrated by some clever artist? Modern science has completed hundreds of thousands of hours of detailed study and intense research on the Shroud. It is, in fact, the single most studied artefact in human history, and we know more about it today than we ever have before. And yet, the controversy still rages on. People from all walks of life have devoted their time and efforts to researching, investigating, experimenting on – and writing about – the Shroud of Turin. To summarise, the cloth bears the photographic image as a NEGATIVE, in THREE dimensions, of a CRUCIFIED man, clearly, very much beaten on his back, with head wounds (remember the thorn crown?), and other wounds specific only to Roman crucifixion (remember the wound in His side?). Blood- and DNA analysis showed that this must have been from a REAL life person.
    As far as I can remember back to 1978, Dr. Max Frei, before his passing, recognized some pollen on the Shroud that are specific to plants that grow exclusively in Palestine e.g. see also here:
    Many forensic experts, who analysed the Shroud’s (positive) pictures (back and front), concluded that this must have been the person named as Jesus of Nazareth in the bible, after (all) the applications of the Roman punishments and crucifixion exactly as described concerning Him, including the very number of lashings on His back and the wound in His side. For example, (and this is just ONE example), there are no thumbs visible on the Shroud. The way Romans crucified criminals, was by hammering big nails through the wrists, near to the hands, onto the wooden cross. Consequently, because of this, the thumbs would fall numb, behind the other fingers. These types of forensic details have led most of the experts that looked at all the scientific evidence coming from the Shroud’s investigations of having subsequently to become believers.
    Yet, contrary to all expectations, carbon dating in 1988 by various laboratories showed the cloth is from the 13th or 14th century… exactly around the same time when it was displayed in Europe for the first time in history. Despite this, many researchers seem to disagree with the carbon dating measurements, e.g. see here
    To quote from the conclusion from the above (very lengthy!) report,
    “Linen-production technology indicates that the Shroud of Turin is probably older than indicated by the date obtained in 1988. There seems to be ample evidence that an anomalous area was sampled for the radiocarbon analysis; therefore, the reported age is almost certainly invalid for the date the cloth was produced. The image was definitely not painted. The observed characteristics of the image rule out any mechanism for colour formation that involves high temperatures or energetic, penetrating radiation…..” etc
    We know from the account in the Gospel of John that there is talk of some 75 or 100 pounds of spices being used, a mixture of myrrh and aloes, to embalm the corpse. That sounds like an extraordinary large amount. Together with the humidity in the tomb, to me, everything seemed set for some as yet unknown chemical or physical reaction. I wonder if anyone ever did some testing with those two chemicals.
    Personally, after evaluating a lot of the evidence, it is my honest opinion that the Shroud is genuine and that it does bear the image of Jesus Christ. I think it is impossible that the image could have been a painted forgery, much less a medieval one. If it really were a fake, it would have required a real crucifixion to have taken place, orchestrated in exactly the way as Jesus died, with all its particular sordid details, including, among other things, the use of Roman whips, a thorn crown, etc. All of this would then have to be recorded in some specifically ingenious way, just so as to get all the specific forensic details correct and to achieve a photographic negative image with the particular 3 dimensional properties exactly as depicted on the Shroud of Turin. This is just statistically impossible.

    Anyway, either way, in fact, we do know that a burial cloth from Jesus did exist in 0 AD. The Scriptures tell us the cloth was there, in the empty tomb, neatly folded up. I think there is a message in that too.
    But even if the Shroud of Turin were dated exactly back to 0 AD, where would that leave us?

    In fact, that places all of us at exactly the same point in history as where the disciples were when they arrived at the empty tomb. There was only one disciple who saw the empty tomb with the cloth neatly folded up, who immediately “believed”. He just knew. The rest of them remained sceptical, probably like you and me would have been, thinking that somebody must have stolen the body. Only when they had seen His appearance did their doubt fade … Doubt seems to be a good beginning….
    God’s love (energy) is so big you cannot get over it and you cannot get around of it. You have to come in at the Door. Jesus is the Door. He is standing with His arms open wide, there, just like a real Father, worried about where you were. Faith is the key that you need.

    Perhaps I have interested you to do some research so as to see what your heavenly Father is like.

    • I. Lou Minotti says:

      Thank you again, Henry. I’m glad that you think the shroud is genuine. For me, it’s of no consequence whether it’s true or not. For you see, the shroud did not die for our sin, nor was it it raised on the third day.

      Thank you also for your concern for my eternity, but I met my Savior–and by extension, my Heavenly Father–many years ago. John 14:6.

  7. lance says:

    As an Albertan, I can only shake my head at the idiots who voted her in. However, I believe she stated, ‘this is the defining moment….etc etc’….yes, defining moment when Albertans made up there mind to toss her and the NDP out in the next election…which is to far away right now….

  8. AndyG55 says:

    Interesting piece from a high ranking Canadian muslim woman

    • Gail Combs says:

      As I thought:
      Raheel Raza is #6 on the list of most hated Muslims in the world. Since she opposes Islamic terrorism and the oppression of Muslim women, she has received a fatwa, death threats, a law suit and and open condemnation from more traditional Muslims.

  9. I. Lou Minotti says:

    The only “enlightenment” taking place is that of our Traitor in Chief alerting the enemy 45 minutes before the US Air Force bombs the shiite out of their oil convoys. This “man” needs to be taken out of the Oval Office in handcuffs and charged with treason:

  10. ntesdorf says:

    You are dealing with some powerful scientific minds at the Grauniad where they think that a rise of 5 degree C is a rise of 41 degrees F (9 degrees F), and a rise of 2 degrees C is a rise of 35.6 degrees F (3.6 degrees F). Their thinking on all other matters is just as reliable.

Leave a Reply