About the author: William Pauwels

William A. Pauwels, Sr. was born in Jackson Michigan to a Belgian, immigrant, entrepreneurial family. Bill is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame and served in executive and/or leadership positions at Thomson Industries, Inc., Dow Corning, Loctite and Sherwin-Williams. He is currently CIO of Pauwels Private Investment Practice. He's been commenting on matters political/economic/philosophical since 1980.

View all articles by William Pauwels
  • AR154U

    The Liberal’s Messiah doesn’t need to read the report,.. he feels Mother Earth crying out to him in his dreams !!! LOL !!

    • Truth Teller

      LOL! And it’s really only Mooseshell bitching at him!

      • Marlin208

        More like Reggie Love. They would be in the same bed together.

  • Azsteve53

    Obama read the report… he reports selected facts or skips ones he does not find to his liking. This is the same president who claims our country is a Democracy not a constitutional Republic. He knows better…..

    • Marlin208

      He does the same with the laws in this country. What HE likes he follows and if he doesn’t like it he just doesn’t follow the rule of law on that one.

  • 4lifeandfreedom

    Is that “it’s own climate report?” Tsk, tsk!

  • Paladin67

    Well of course he didn’t read it…. that would have interrupted his golf game or his sleep….
    “jus’ put it on the prompter and i’ll read it…ya’all make sure that prompter works now, ya hear!”

  • Janeen Alley

    Wow, what an idiot! He has people give him reports & doesn’t read them. WTF does he even bother having someone to give him a report if he isn’t going to read them? Maybe he needs it on a teleprompter!

    • Marlin208

      He gets the report and when it does fit into his agenda, he just throws it in the trash.

    • 19gundog43

      Obama can read? Who knew?

  • Eric Haulenbeek

    You don’t suppose that brown guy is lying to us, do you?

    • FriendofThom

      You don’t suppose the guy that refers to President Obama as “that brown guy” is a racist a-h0le, do you?

      • peteserb

        I find that your comments tend to show your liberal racism.

        • FriendofThom

          liberal racism? HAHAHA!

          • mac12sam12

            There’s plenty of that which is ignored by state run media. HAHAHA!

      • RoBoTech

        No.
        Dear George (Soros),

        Please send a COMPETENT Troll. Isn’t it time for the 2nd shift?

      • coman1

        Brown guy, white guy, black guy – what’s racist about this !

        • FriendofThom

          Why reference his skin color if not racist?

          • coman1

            Guess you are a racist. There is only ONE human race, and there are blondes, browns……………..just go down the list !

  • Marlin208

    First off these liberal idiots never read anything. Second they lie about everything
    Isn’t it great to have a pResident that we can look up to and admire.
    Gone are the days when that was possible.
    The scum has risen to the top now and I doubt we will be able to skim it off.

    • FriendofThom

      Did you look up to and admire Dumbya Bush, the moron who allowed Iraqi ammo dumps to be looted for months for the munitions used to kill or wound thousands of American soldiers?

      • charles_hakes

        Hey FriendofThom
        Did you look up long enough to realize that Obama is president now and is dragging America kicking and screaming into communism? What Bush did or didn’t do about munitions dumps is entirely unrelated to what Obama is doing to America. Do you have an attention span problem?

        • FriendofThom

          Communism?? Define it for me.

          • 19gundog43

            Liberal moon bat tool. LMAO!

          • Joan

            All ya have to do is look in mirror,, Is that enough definition for ya?????

          • Sonshine

            All decisions made on everything are made by someone other than yourself. You are not able to pursue your dreams if it does not conform to the ideology. You are not free! That is Communism.

      • RoBoTech

        No.
        Next Strawman, please.

      • Eliott

        First of all, Bush has been out of office for 5 years now. Secondly, what Bush did or didn’t do did not and had no chance of ruining the country. This poor excuse for a President has no respect for our military and as much as he touts being a freedom fighter for the middle class, his policies are killing the middle class. It’s liberals like you who truly believe the unemployment figure as being correct, not realizing it is so low because thousands and thousands of people have given up looking. He is keeping the Keystone Pipeline from being built which would create many jobs but that is so unimportant to this idiot. All he cares about is fund raising. You, being a true liberal, I would love for you to defend Barry going a fund raiser tour approximately 12 hours after 4 Americans were brutally murdered in Benghazi. Please let me know how you defend that.

        • FriendofThom

          Bush’s failure to crack down on mortgage and securities fraud brought the country to the edge of economic collapse. Saying President Obama has no respect for our military is ludicrous BS..He is right to be skeptical about what the brass tell him, with their history of lies about Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman, MyLai, etc. Hundreds if not thousands of baby boomers are retiring every day. Some may be retiring earlier than they had planned, but most of them are financially secure. The Keystone pipeline would create 10- 20,000 for a couple of years.. hardly a big boon for employment. What do you think President Obama should have done the day after the Benghazi attack.. sit in the office and wring his hands? Please tell me you aren’t that stupid.

          • Eliott

            I give up. You are a typical stupid liberal. Excuse me for being redundant. If you do not have a problem with him going on a fund raiser that soon after Benghazi, there is nothing I could say to you.

          • FriendofThom

            You think Dumbya Bush didn’t go to any fundraisers while Iraqi ammo dumps were being looted for months, for the munitions used to kill or wound thousands of American soldiers? The Americans killed in Benghazi won’t be the last killed by these moron terrorists.. Life goes on.

          • 19gundog43

            Obama stooge. Go back to your basement troll.

          • Frank W Brown

            The stupidity starts with your post!

          • fistdeyuma

            Would you be willing to read the reports Bush sent congress warning about the housing scams? Would you be willing to watch the video of McCain warning about the housing scam? Would you be willing to view the video of top Democrats slamming Bush and McCain for trying to scare people because they did not want the poor to afford a house?
            While Bush did a lot of things I disliked, he is history. Obama is now and anyone with half a brain would understand that Obama is far worse than Bush ever was.
            Obama lies, which despite the Liberal slander machine about Bush be never lied. No example of a lie could ever be proven. (Lie; knowingly saying something he or she knows to be false.) The best the Liberals could come up with was where they disagreed with Bush on what the facts meant. Their EGO is so large they think anyone who does not agree with them is a liar.
            Obama spends 4x what Bush spent, despite the two wars winding down.
            Obama plans for the country have all failed. Instead of admitting his mistakes he falls back to his blame game and lies.
            I am fed up with Liberal myths being used to excuse clear lies and incompetence by our current President.

          • luciteehee

            The most IMPORTANT point is, the Bush’s were well-known, had a history, their “PAST” revealed for the world to see, had jobs, EARNED their money, didn’t spend over a billion dollars per year on personal expenses, served in the Military, contributed to society, left a legacy of worth, had talents, accomplishments, success’s, education, expertise, and Political knowledge that benefited American! AND just in case you failed to read the REAL FACTS, friendofthom, MORE DEMOCRATS approved the Iraq war than Conservatives! Check it out! Clapper told GW that Saddam was moving WMD to Syria, and if he did NOT invade Iraq WE would be a target and it would be Bush’s FAULT! Read the history! SO did Hillary, Pelosi, Reid, Susan, and the REST of the “GW might-be-President-but-we-run-Washington” ego-maniacs!

          • FriendofThom

            Would you be willing to read some articles about FBI Assistant Director for criminal investigations Chris Swecker’s request in late 2004- early 2005 for 200 agents to crack down on mortgage fraud, a request that was denied by higher ups at Bush & Co? The original Charlotte Observer article is no longer available, but here is a board post with quotes:
            http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=59279624 Swecker told the Observer the lesson from the Savings and Loan crisis in the 1980s and 1990s and the corporate fraud cases uncovered after the collapse of Enron Corp. in the 2000s was that authorities needed a “surge” of resources to attack the problem. “We weren’t allowed to surge on the mortgage fraud,” he said.

            A CNN report from Sept 2004:
            http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/09/17/mortgage.fraud/

          • fistdeyuma

            Nice try. Both links led to a person posting about a funding battle. While fraud was a big sign to me that something was wrong it was small fish as to what was really going on. It also has nothing to do with the political battle which was Democrats defending the loan standards (with lies and slander as is normal) against Republicans who were sounding the alarm.

          • FriendofThom

            Bottom line: Bush could have nipped the mortgage/ securities fraud in the bud by fulfilling the Assistant FBI director’s request for 200 agents to crack down on the fraud, but he considered tax cuts for the rich to be more important.

          • fistdeyuma

            You stretch your “if” a long way so you can deflect blame from those who actively supported the system as it was. The Democrats hit the roof when Bush even hinted that there might be a problem, saying he hated the poor and middle class. I’ll take video proof of what the Democrats said, and then denied they said, over an “if” you pull out of your rear.

          • FriendofThom

            1) Fraud wasn’t legalized.
            2) There was rampant fraud
            3) Request of Assistant FBI director for more agents to crack down on mortgage fraud was denied by Bush & Co

          • fistdeyuma

            I’m calling you on another of the BS myths you guys invent about Bush. You are either making up out of whole cloth or twisting something real into something else. When you Liberals start using the truth? Aaaa, never mind. If Liberals used the truth they would no longer be Liberals.

          • FriendofThom

            Did you read the information in the two links I provided in post above? Obviously you didn’t.

          • fistdeyuma

            I read one and as I said, it was a story about a funding battle. You don’t seem to understand the difference between funding and actions or “if” and “did”. If we had 5,000 trillion dollars to spend on defense we could win all wars. Get our of the land of myths and into the real world.

          • FriendofThom

            Yes.. a funding battle all within the Bush White House, and they decided tax cuts for the rich were more important that funding more FBI agents to crack down on the mortgage fraud.

          • fistdeyuma

            Are you really this stupid or just massively uninformed? Is there a sound bite you don’t have memorized instead of thinking? The “rich” paid more in percent of taxes after the tax cuts than before. Lower incomes stopped paying altogether and many got money back on taxes they never paid.
            Look, we are in the internet age. You can look this stuff up yourself. I’m tired of trying to educate you.

          • mac12sam12

            Forbes magazine had an article years ago called Affirmative Action Banking. That practice started in the Clinton administration and was fully promoted by democrats. Forbes also said that policy will eventually crash the banks as well as housing. If you remember Bush had two houses of democrats who wouldn’t consider stopping the practice. Typical liberal ”feelgoodism” policy that failed.

          • FriendofThom

            There was another way Bush could have dealt with it.

            1) Fraud wasn’t legalized.
            2) There was rampant fraud
            3) Request of Assistant FBI director for more agents to crack down on mortgage fraud was denied by Bush & Co

          • mac12sam12

            There’s more fraud and corruption in the Obama administration than any other in history. Want a list?

      • Frank W Brown

        I see you are STILL stuck in the past, get a life and QUIT drinking the kool-aid, it’s POISON!

      • Joan

        How about the drones that Obama is using huh you silly fool!!

        • FriendofThom

          What does the use of drones have to do with Bush allowing Iraqi ammo dumps to be looted for months?? Idiot.

          • reggiec

            What does your post have to do with the article. Another attempt to deflect.

      • mac12sam12

        Bush, the liberal deflection of the failures of the democrats.

  • David S.

    The climate has been changing since the Earth was formed and shall continue to do so. This is not news, especially the part about the government getting it wrong. Again.

    • FriendofThom

      The government? What about the National Academy of Sciences, the most prestigious scientific organization in the country for 125+ years? Was it infiltrated by commie scientists so they could use it to promote the global warming hoax in order to advance socialism? Why hasn’t the Republican House investigated to find out?

      • kbrockm

        Prestige does not equal good science. Have you heard of “Climate-Gate?” That was your “prestigious scientific community” covering up the flaws in the global warming theory that basically showed the whole idea of man-made global warming is wrong. Billions of dollars worth of research grants depend on the existence of man-made global warming, so “prestigious scientific organizations” continue to perpetuate the myth in order to keep their grants, and therefore their jobs. Here is a great website (and book,) by an engineer who wanted to know for himself what the truth about global warming was, so he did his own research. http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/

        • FriendofThom

          Are you referring to the East Anglia emails? The science committee of the British Parliament reviewed them and found that they did not discredit the science of manmade global warming. The National Academy of Sciences agrees. Scientists get more research funds regardless of whether their research supports global warming or is inconclusive. The Republican House has taken 50 votes to repeal or defund Obamacare.. How many have they taken to defund scientists they allege are promoting a hoax on global warming?

          • kbrockm

            Right, so two more governmental agencies reviewed them and found nothing wrong! And you trust them? Read the book!

          • FriendofThom

            The National Academy of Sciences is not a government agency, although they do sometimes do research on an issue at the request of the government.

          • kbrockm

            Tell ya what, you believe whatever you want to believe, and I’ll observe the weather and see for myself that global warming, climate change, or whatever the “name du jour” is, is a bunch of nonsense. (Backed up by plenty of real science.)

          • FriendofThom

            And be sure to rant at Republicans that they should defund all the scientists promoting the hoax!

          • kbrockm

            Ok, troll! I will!

          • Joan

            You are silly fool!!!!

          • reggiec

            No need, the general populace has made the determination that AGW is at the bottom of their list of priorities. In other words; they do not believe it.

          • FriendofThom

            No need to stop throwing away tens of millions of dollars to scientists promoting a hoax??? Why not?

          • 19gundog43

            Low information sheeple.BAAAAAAAAAAA Obot! LOL!

      • I’mBaaaatmaaaan!

        shut up and drink your kool aid…

      • reggiec

        Another fallacy promoted by AGW proponents is that the Artic
        is warming as a result of man using fossil fuels. NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) has reported that their research indicates a cooling trend beginning before 1950.

        Every “computer model” supporting AGW I have heard of so far
        goes no further than the hypothesis stage. They are not even a legitimate hypothesis because of the fudge factors. Additionally they are not legitimate because the creators will not even allow authentic scientific peer review. They claim their data is proprietary.

        These computer modelers seem to be stuck way back in the
        period of Sir Isaac Newton. Newton’s laws were based on what were called deterministic results based on past observations and were then converted into mathematical formulas and disciplines. In other words, if a certain result was experienced in a past experiment and if everything were done exactly the same, the results would be the same and could be calculated mathematically. That might be true for some simple things like the time a pendulum takes to swing
        back and forth in a vacuum is determined by the length of the arm of the pendulum. Modern science has discovered there is another factor that has some very profound effects on just about everything related to natural events. It is called “Chaos Theory”.
        Weather is one of the most chaotic activities on the planet.

        This theory is attempting to explain all those random
        variables (entropy) and how they relate to prediction. Scientists following in Newton’s footsteps were aware that sometimes prediction did not follow his strict laws but they did not understand why this was so. Modern AGW supporters who create mathematical models to confirm their ideas create their own corrections to counteract the chaos of natural things. Since that chaos is not very well understood even at this time, their corrections (fudge factors) are basically guesses that are often the result of confirmation bias.

        Sir James Lighthill who held a prestigious academic chair in
        the United Kingdom made this statement in 1986.

        We are all deeply conscious today that the enthusiasm of our forebears for the marvelous achievements of Newtonian mechanics led them to make generalizations in this area of predictability which, indeed, we may have generally tended to believe before 1960, but which we now recognize were false.

        Paul Weingartner, another researcher in the field of Chaos
        theory says that

        “…the new discovery now was that […] a dynamical system obeying Newton’s laws […] can become chaotic in its behavior and practically unpredictable”.

        Charlotte Werndl, Faculty of Philosophy, University of
        Cambridge, has this to say about predictability.

        From the beginning of chaos research until today, the unpredictability of chaos has been a central theme. It is widely believed and claimed by philosophers, mathematicians and
        physicists alike that chaos has a new implication for unpredictability, meaning that chaotic systems are unpredictable in a way that other deterministic systems are not. Hence, one might expect that the question ‘What are the new implications of chaos for unpredictability?’ has already been answered in a
        satisfactory way. However, this is not the case. I will critically evaluate the existing answers and argue that they do not fit the bill. Then I will approach this question by showing that chaos can be defined via mixing, which has never before been explicitly argued for. Based on this insight, I will propose that the sought-after new implication of chaos for unpredictability is the following: for predicting any event, all sufficiently past events are approximately probabilistically irrelevant.

        A scientist who avoids the significance of entropy or the
        chaos theory or abandons the peer review process is not a scientist; he is a snake oil salesman.

  • CJS3

    Global cooling, then global warming, now climate change. When the dire predictions of the scientific elite don’t pan out, they just change the name and ask for more money. This is nothing more than a religion, and the faithful have declared war on the infidel non believers.

  • teaman

    There
    Are No Such Things as ‘Scientists’

    We should get rid of the word and
    simply replace it with “some guy.”

    Our society holds
    scientists in high esteem. When scientists say something — whether
    it’s about the composition of matter, the beginning of the
    universe, or who would win a fight between a giant gorilla and a T.
    Rex — we all sit up and listen. And it doesn’t matter if they say
    something that sounds completely ridiculous; as long as a statement
    is preceded with “scientists say,” we assume it is truth.

    There’s just one problem with that: There are no such things as
    scientists.

    Okay, you’re
    probably saying, “What? Scientists are real! I’ve seen them
    before! There’s even a famous, blurry photo of a man in a lab coat
    walking through the woods.” Well, yes, there are people known as
    scientists and who call themselves such, but the word is pretty much
    meaningless.

    What is a scientist? It’s some guy who works in scientific
    research. That’s it. Scientist isn’t like some official title.
    There isn’t an International White Lab Coat Authority which only
    hands out white coats to people who pass rigorous tests and then
    monitors these people to make sure their methods remain sound.

    I want you to do something right now. Find a book. Hold it over the
    floor. Now release it. Write down what you observe.

    Boom! You’ve just become a scientist. Congratulations. Because a
    scientist is basically anyone.

    Again, I’ll bet you’re protesting. “Scientists aren’t just
    anyone! They’re people who have used science to give us great
    things, like lasers and computers and seedless watermelons!” Yes,
    some people have used science to do some remarkable accomplishments…
    but how many of the people who go by the name “scientist” have
    actually done anything practical? How many are nearing the cure for
    cancer, versus how many are those idiots who tell us for years that
    some food causes cancer and then suddenly say the food prevents
    cancer? How many scientists help society, and how many are just
    throwing out noise and filling up AP copy?

    You don’t know. This is something you should know — especially if
    you want to put meaning behind the word “scientist” — but you
    don’t. Not only that, but think of the most famous living
    scientists. Like Stephen Hawking. I mean, everyone has heard of him.
    He has to be an outstanding scientist doing useful things, right?
    Well, do you have evidence of that? What has Stephen Hawking’s
    science led to? Maybe one day it will help us make a warp drive or
    something, but if I said, “Stephen Hawking is a complete and utter
    fraud. Everything he says is nonsense,” would you have any way to
    prove me right or wrong? Hawking’s stuff is all far out theory
    built upon more far out theory. What are you going to do? Blow up a
    black hole and demonstrate that he’s wrong?

    Which brings us back to our problem. So much of science these days
    seems to be built on faith — faith being something that doesn’t
    have anything to do with science. Yet everyone apparently has faith
    that all these scientists we hear about follow good methods and are
    smart and logical and unbiased — when we can’t actually know any
    of that. So often news articles contain phrases such as, “scientists
    say,” “scientists have proven,” “scientists agree” — and
    people treat those phrases like they mean something by themselves,
    when they don’t mean anything at all. It’s like if you wanted
    music for your wedding, and someone came up to you and said, “I
    know a guy. He’s a musician.”

    http://pjmedia.com/blog/there-are-no-such-things-as-scientists/

    • Chubby Freen

      Consider this: Until it was disbanded in 1998 as part of the settlement with overreaching govt at the time, “scientists” from the American Tobacco Institute continually attacked all research that suggested that smoking was bad for your health…

      • Pete Bruno

        Yup. It’s called buy a scientist to support whatever position benefits you. That’s what the UN did with the so-called Global Warming fiasco, and the tobacco companies with their studies that nicotine and tar doesn’t harm you.
        I’m living proof that isn’t true! Have Stage 3A, small cell lung cancer I’m fighting right now. Smoked for 56 years! Am paying the price today!

  • fistdeyuma

    You have to ask yourself. Is this another example of Obama’s incompetence or an example of Obama lying? Given his track record I lean towards lying. However it is possible he never bothered to read the report and is just repeating some talking points he was given.

    • Pete Bruno

      He’s lying to support a political agenda. Man-Made gasses are the cause of Climate Change, so say the Environmentalists who deliver lots of votes, and so says billionaire Tom Steyer, who pledged $100 million to support Democrats if OBAMA stopped the Keystone XL Pipeline.

      Where I come from that’s called PROSTITUTION! Clearly our president is a whore!

  • BUD

    ONLY THE SHEEPLE, BELIEVE THE BS EMINATING FROM THE OVAL OFFICE.

    • Wayne Ogilvy

      I think you meant ORAL office didn’t you ?

      • stbaumsb9155

        yes the one connected to the white-out-house!

    • Pete Bruno

      MINDLESS MINIONS!

  • Deb Scott

    look at the government food “scientists” who vilified coffee, bacon, fat, butter, alcohol, ect., ect., only to be proven wrong later. they will be proven wrong about steriods and growth hormons in our meat and dairy, talk about obesity enforcing!

    • Pete Bruno

      Remember the great saccharine witch hunt? Put the manufacturer out of business, and a couple hundred people out on the street. Then they figured out it wasn’t bad for you after all! That’s do-gooders, doing their goodest!

  • yaki534

    If the government had its way we would be grazing on our lawn providing that it wasn’t treated with commercial fertilizers.

  • Joan

    I know what they’re problem is! They no not how to read!!!!!!

    • Pete Bruno

      Actually they just have a unique way of interpreting facts.

  • Joan

    This is what happens when one has it head up ones backsiide

  • Sonshine

    Global Warming is the new world orders religion; all who oppose it will be labeled heretics. History has show us that a free people welcome different opinions and those who suppress the opinions of others; are tyrants! The release of this report
    coincided with the UN call for a world wide Green Economy. Look to Spain as to
    what that will do to the world’s economy. Spain invested billions it borrowed from the World Bank only to experience a higher than usual unemployment; almost 25% unemployment; Spain’s conversion to a green economy failed miserably and no one on the Global Warming Alarmists ban wagon will call attention to what it has
    done to Spain. Foretold is forwarded!

  • reggiec

    Energy control is the goal

    If you look closely every attempt by the left to control
    society eventually reverts to the control of the production and allocation of
    energy sources.

    Fascism:

    A system of government marked by centralization of authority
    under a dictator (Or wanna be dictator), stringent socioeconomic controls,
    suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship and massive
    regulation of private business.

    If you attain the complete control over the production and
    allocation of energy you control EVERYTHING and EVERYONE.

    If you think that statement is too harsh; try to think of
    one single thing you do that does not require some input of energy you do not
    supply yourself. Hard to identify something? Now take it one step further. Try
    to identify who controls the energy you do use daily. In almost every case the
    government is gaining more and more control over the sources and allocation of
    energy in every respect.

    The whole “climate change” indoctrination program is to
    enable ideologues to control energy.

    Remember this Obama quote:

    “On issues that are important to us, we’re going to punish
    our enemies and reward our friends”

    You can bet the Obama administration’s out of control EPA
    will be actively rewarding the allocation of energy on the bases of identifying
    enemies and friends.

    • Apolloone

      You’re correct, So called- Health Care, Gun Grabbing and by this elaborate global warming scam is all about controlling the masses, not to mention the many billions of dollars they will make. As a Christian I study the Scriptures so this isn’t surprising to me to see prophecy being fulfilled. The short lived One World Government will come upon this unsuspecting world. In the book of Daniel we are shown that Satan can and does control governments the French Historian Alexis de Tocqueville wanted to know why America was great his conclusion was that America was great because America was good and if America stopped being good then America would cease to be great.

  • I_P_Frehley

    More nonsensical hysterics and untruths being farted out by politicians and apparatchiks concerning globalanthropogenicwarmingmanmadeclimatechange? Interesting indeed…

PRIORITIES: Guess What Obama Is Doing For LDW Instead of Forming A Strategy to Defeat ISIS
BOOM: Watch U.S. Airstrike Takes Out A Truck Full of ISIS Fighters
MORE CONFUSION: AB 1951, the “Gay Birth Certificate” Bill
BOTTOM LINE: Defending Sports Names Until Price Is Right
OBAMA BLAMING AMERICA: ‘Tis the Season to Charge with Treason
SPEAKING UP! It Can Cost You Friendships: Are You Willing?
SHAME ON SHAME? Well, Perhaps Not Always
NO PLEASING THIS BUNCH: Date Rape Nail Polish Rejected
Load more