Open Letter to Robert Rubbo Director of Health, and the City of Torrington

A group headed by you Robert Rubbo, MPH, Director of Health, Torrington, CT and several as yet unknown city officials made false statements, threats and by their uniformed presence intimidated tenants into allowing you entrance into their home on August 11, 2015. Your purpose was to find evidence of hazardous materials on the property to be used for my arrest.

Undeterred by not finding hazardous quantities of lead or any other hazardous materials, and continuing the conspiracy and fraud; armed only with unsubstantiated claims of finding minute and non-hazardous quantities of lead, I was threatened with fines and arrest in an ORDER which I received August 20, 2015.

The second paragraph of the ORDER cites Connecticut State Statutes Section 119a-111 et seq. then quotes a part of 119a-111c (a) omitting from the ORDER the “interim controls” that will help a child who has high lead content in her blood. The following quote from Connecticut law was NOT quoted in the ORDER. “For the purposes of this section, “remediation” means the use of interim controls, including, but not limited to, paint stabilization, spot point repair, dust control, specialized cleaning and covering of soil with mulch.” The ORDER and the threats it contained certainly did not include the possibility of “interim controls” It seems your point is not to help a little girl but rather scare me by misleading me with lies. The question is: “Why?” Do you have investments or friends in a lead abatement company? Are you a school-yard bully?

In previous correspondence I have asked you if you consider the law and the “use of interim controls” sufficient for lead abatement. You do not answer. I could either follow the law or your ORDER to “Adequately abate … ALL DEFECTIVE … MATERIAL … as more specifically described in the attached document” (CAPS are quoted as written in the ORDER”.)

There was no attached document. An unsigned, undated document followed accompanied by a letter dated August 31, 2015, listing areas of the apartment as “defective” making the clear implication that you do not expect interim controls as called for by Connecticut law. So the question remains if you expect me to follow the law or to follow your ORDER of August 18, 2015. Those are very different things.

By telephone you told me that you were required by law to send the threatening ORDER and you referred me to 119a-111-2 Applicability of regulations quoted in the ORDER sections (a), (b), (c) and (d) (both times omitting the very important section (e) which I quote below). This is the same passage you sent to me in a 16 page Xerox highlighted in purple with a very short letter dated September 2, 2015. There is nothing in this passage which directs the Department of Health or any other person to do anything.

Prominently mentioned in your ORDER are “toxic levels of lead”. So please direct me to the law which specifically states what levels of lead found on “exterior surfaces”, “common areas”, “interior dust”, “drinking water” and “exterior soil” are toxic levels of lead. In the law I found Section 119a-111-4 (j) “Risk Assessment-For the purpose of assessing the level of risk from lead dust, a lead dust hazard is present when the concentration of lead in dust is equal to or exceeds the following. (A) floors – 40 mg/sq. ft. (micrograms per square foot); (B) window sills – 250 mg/sq. ft. Obviously these are not measurements that you used. In your undated, unsigned testing from my property you state, for example, that the Living Room “Front Door jamb = 1.0 (defective)”. We need to know how many mg/sq. ft is your reading of 1.0.

Also please explain why drinking water and dust were not tested, or if they were tested, why those tests were not included in the unsigned report of testing you sent me. I have previously asked you to tell me about any testing done NOT included in the reports, such as toys, utensils, clothing, especially shoes, soil, and who besides you can verify the testing. You do not answer.

Your ORDER continues “Pursuant to Section 19a-111-3 (f) … authority is vested in the local code enforcement agency…” This is most curious since Section 19a-111-3 (f) is titled “Post Abatement Inspection” and mentions nothing about enforcement of any kind. So please let me know by what authority you wrote this ORDER against me of August 18, 2015 because it is NOT 19a-111-3 (f) as you claim.

You ORDER me to “Eliminate LEAD DUST HAZARDS” although you do not refer to any lead dust hazards in any communication. Then you say to “Adequately manage... as more specifically described in the attached document”. I have notified you before that no such document has been found. Then “FURTHER, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that” and you quote from 119a-111-2. Again your ORDER is misleading because you leave out a good portion of that section of law, the section (e).

You quote heavily from 19a-111-2 (and sent a purple highlighted copy) but omitted section (e) which begins “Intact surfaces … are not required to be abated by these regulations. However when a child resides in the dwelling the owner shall have a lead management plan…” It seems to me this is the only workable part of the law and should have been prominently mentioned in your ORDER of August 18, 2015. Or better you could have told me about it, or given me a pamphlet. Having a lead abatement plan within 60 days of finding hazardous lead on any property seems a reasonable request for a health department. I wonder why such was not included in your ORDER but is clearly stated in the laws you reference by Section and number but do not quote. There are also pamphlets available from the Connecticut Health Department to explain the law. Apparently you need those pamphlets to educate yourself about the law.

Your ORDER then cites 19a-111-4 and 5 “of the regulations” as if such sections of law support your ORDER that “A written lead abatement plan prepared by a Lead Professional must be submitted to the Director of Health within 15 working days of the receipt of the completed lead report.” I know of no such report nor any law that would require anyone to make such a plan in 15 working days. This is clear over- reach of authority and you have never shown that you have authority under Connecticut law. Clearly the law does NOT say such a thing, but you do. The question remains where you derive your authority since you do not cite law to support your authority. And why on earth you are doing this to me. Your ORDER of August 18 is a travesty and an embarrassment to any who believe in the laws of Connecticut.

Headed in bold caps, fourth paragraph after “YOU ARE THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED” is this: “TORRINGTON AREA HEALTH DISTRICT LEAD POSIONING PREVENTION REGULATIONS Section 4-2 Lead abatement and Lead management plans allow the Director of Health to order the owner to engage the services of a Lead Professional to design a lead abatement plan and/or management plan in accordance with the requirements of the RCSA Lead Poisoning and Prevention Control Regulations_ The lead abatement and management plans must be submitted to the Director of Health within the timetables specified in this order.” I can find no such Regulations. The often quoted section of applicable law with the closest numbering system to “Section 4-2” is 19a-111-4 (2) Containment – The abatement area shall be properly contained… Obviously this is not the Section 4-2 to which the ORDER of August 18, 2015 refers. So please refer me to the Torrington Area Health District Lead Poisoning Prevention Regulations Section 4-2 that your ORDER refers to.

Your clearly defective ORDER of August 18, 2015 against me, under threat of arrest and fine, gives me no recourse under the law except appeal. If you believe I could have handled the situation differently please tell me how one handles a bully like you. Perhaps you expect me to call you and beg you to please change the ORDER of August 18, 2015 into something that can be performed so that I can keep you happy and avoid fines and jail time. It certainly seems like this is your purpose in writing the ORDER. The other possibility is you have friends or investments in some local lead abatement firm.

I am not a lawyer but I am familiar with the Federal Courts and the laws. If I can find no other way to stop your actions against my neighbors I will try to find other recourse to stop your future actions and the actions of those present with you when you bullied your way into my tenants’ home. Perhaps the City of Torrington which is responsible for your actions will have comment. I believe you willfully deprived me of my rights and conspired to deprive me of my rights with those present when you committed fraud and threatened these good people if they did not allow entrance. Then you tested for lead that you did not find, fraudulently reported minuscule and unverified findings, and proceeded to write the ORDER referred to above.

Unlike a lawyer nothing you or anyone else says to me is confidential in any way and I will not hide from you my purpose. I will announce to you all my actions. I think it is only right that a person such as you is sufficiently punished publically for such egregious acts against me and my Torrington area neighbors. Torrington City Policy should change thusly:

City Authorities should not attempt to enter homes under threat and/or with police escort unless armed with a Warrant.

Verbal and written representations of law by City officials should be accurate and complete.

Orders should name specific violations of law if they exists, and should name specific reasons under the law for writing the Order. If a danger to the community exists an Order should clearly state a danger and a remedy under the law.

All testing should name the equipment used, who used it, who verified the readings, date and time used, subject to perjury laws.

I will be forwarding this letter to others including the Department of Public Health, Public Health Hearing Office, 410 Capitol Avenue MS 13 PHO P.O. Box 340308 Hartford, CT 06134-0308, The Torrington Mayor, and the Register Citizen.
Sincerely, Kent Johnson
233 East Main Street
Torrington, CT 06790

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Suit against Torrington and Robert Rubbo

I intend to sue officials of the City of Torrington in Federal Court for willful deprivation of my rights  and conspiracy to deprive me of my rights. The suit will ask for an injunction to cease their attempts to enter homes under threat and/or with police escort unless armed with a Warrant. Stop using untrue, inaccurate and misleading verbal and/or written representations of law to area citizens.  Future Orders against area citizens signed by city officials must name specific violations of law, must clearly state the danger making the Order necessary and the expected remedy. Any evidence presented against an area citizen in such an order must name any equipment used, who used it, and who verified. gathered and reported the evidence subject to perjury laws.  And punitive damages.

Headed by Robert Rubbo, MPH, Director of Health, Torrington, CT several as yet unknown city officials made false statements, threats and by their uniformed presence intimidated tenants into allowing entrance in order to find evidence of hazardous materials to be used for my arrest.

Undeterred by not finding hazardous quantities of lead or any other hazardous materials, and continuing the conspiracy and fraud;  armed only with unsubstantiated claims of finding minute and non-hazardous quantities of lead, I was threatened with fines and arrest in an ORDER written by Rubbo.

Link to Order

From: Kent Johnson 233 East Main Street Torrington, CT 06790, August 23, 2015.

Dear State of Connecticut Commissioner of Public Health,

This is a NOTICE OF APPEAL according to CGS section 19a-9-14b (attached).I hereby notify you of the impending appeal of the ORDER issued to me by the Town of Torrington. I received the ORDER Thursday August 20, 2015.  The first business day “after the date of…receipt of such order” is Friday August 21.  By statute I have until end of business Tuesday, August 25, 2015 for you to receive this NOTICE.

The information required by Sec. 19a-9-14(attached) follows

  1. Kent Johnson, 233 East Main Street, Torrington, CT 06790 (860) 626-8486.
  2. Torrington Area Health District, Robert Rubbo, MPH, Director of Health.
  3. The order is confusing and incomplete, to wit referring to “attached documents” which cannot be found and applications for the LAMPP project attached. Also the house and apartment to which the order refers has already been through lead abatement.  A more complete listing of problems will follow with the appeal required by the practice book 19a-9-1 through 19a-9-29.
  4. This NOTICE refers to the ORDER dated August 18, 2015 sent to the aggrieved named in section 1 above sent by the authority named in section 2 above.
  5. This appeal is grounded in the fact that the ORDER is illogical, unreasonable, incomplete, unclear and impossible to perform. Clearly the “authority” who wrote it had no intention that it be followed. It is merely a threat of arrest, the sort of bullying that CGS Sec. 19a-229 is meant to abate.

For your convenience I will follow up with a “telephonic notice of appeal” and a faxed copy before the tenth business day, which is September 4, 2015.

I also require a notice that this Notice of Appeal has been received so that I will not be arrested by Torrington Authorities for not following a nonsensical ORDER.

               Thank you for your kind attention —  Kent Johnson

For your convenience all of this will be posted online under my AgainstGoliath brand.  Please note no communication with me is confidential in any way.

Attached Connecticut State Statues


Connecticut General Statutes § 19a-229 states, “(a) Any person aggrieved by an order issued by a town, city or borough director of health may appeal to the Commissioner of Public Health not later than three business days after the date of such person’s receipt of such order, who shall thereupon immediately notify the authority from whose order the appeal was taken, and examine into the merits of such case, and may vacate, modify or affirm such order.

Sec. 19a-9-14: Appeals of orders issued by a town, city, borough, or district director of health.
(a)  Any person aggrieved by an order issued by a local director of health may appeal said order to the commissioner.
(b)  The notice of appeal shall be filed with the commissioner not later than three (3) business days after the date of such person’s receipt of such order.
(c)  The notice of appeal shall state:
1. the name, address, and telephone number of the person claiming to be aggrieved;
2. the name of the issuing authority;
3. the way in which the order adversely affects the person claiming to be aggrieved;
4. the order being appealed; and
5. the grounds for appeal.
(d)  Telephonic notice of appeal to the office of the commissioner shall be satisfactory as the initial notice of appeal, provided written notice of appeal from the person claiming to be aggrieved is received by the department within ten (10) days of the telephonic notice.
(e)  An appeal from an order issued by a town, city or borough, or district director of health shall be a de novo proceeding in accordance with the regulations governing contested cases as set forth in section 19a-9-1 through 19a-9-29 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.
(f)  Any order issued by a town, city, borough, or district director of health shall include a notice of the right to appeal which shall indicate the name and telephone number of the commissioner or the commissioner’s designee, and shall be accompanied by copies of sections 19a-9-8 and 19a-9-14 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.


Robert Rubbo, MPH, Director of Health
Torrington Area Health District
350 Main St. – Suite A
Torrington, CT 06790

Telephone (860) 489-0436 I 482-9787                                              August 24, 2015
Dear sir,
Imagine my surprise to receive your Order with no warning. If you need to contact me or you would like help of any kind from me or my employees or tenants I would appreciate a call or a note. I am very easy to find at the address and phone number below.
I assure you all lead that I could find has been removed from all three of my houses. Windows have been replaced and new sheetrock has been installed. I know of no lead problems and your Order of August 18, 2015 is to “Adequately abate … as more specifically described in the attached document”. There was no document attached. Your Order also mentions a “completed lead report” that I have not found.
Please forward to me those documents and any information you have about lead on my property as soon as possible so that we can take care of any lead problems.
In the mean time please do not further visit my property without me present. It is my belief that your only reason for visiting my property is to find evidence against me, as supported by your Order of August 18. Such actions will not help a little girl avoid getting lead in her system, I hope you agree and we can work together to that end.
In order to avoid arrest I have filed an appeal according to CGS 19a-229, attached. I certainly wish we could have handled this differently, but I don’t want to go to jail.
Kent Johnson
233 East Main Street
Torrington, CT 06790

(860) 626-8486


August 28 received a call from Robert Rubbo about 11 AM.   He was nice enough and said that he believed he was required by law to do what he did.  I said I didn’t want to argue with him, and I believed that he believed he had to do something like what he did.  That I just wanted to avoid arrest.  He said I am not going to be arrested.  I said the Order said I would, and he said, well, if I didn’t respond I would have to appear somewhere and the police might issue a citation.  In any case the papers that were attached are a pretty good deal.  I got them in front of me, they were what he sent with the order, the LAMPP Project application.  I said they appeared to be for the parents, for the tenants in my apartment.  He said, well, maybe, but there is a part for the owner as well.  I don’t see that part.  Well, he said, he did not have it in front of him, but if I needed help filling it out he would call me back.  He said in no uncertain terms there was something for the owner of the property to fill out.  I said I would await his call.

About an hour later he called back and asked how he could help me with filling out the form.  I said that all I see is a form for the tenants who are supposed to name the owner of the property.  He said yes, but it is a very good deal and I should fill out the form.  I stopped him and said this has nothing to do with me.  All I got was an order that I cannot fulfill so I filed an appeal.

He said, okay, see you at the hearing.  Goodbye.


 There is a Title 19a which is also called Chapter 368a, which I think is it.

In that section: “The Commissioner of Public Health shall adopt regulations, in accordance with chapter 54, to establish requirements and procedures for testing, remediation, abatement and management of materials containing toxic levels of lead. For the purposes of this section, “remediation” means the use of interim controls, including, but not limited to, paint stabilization, spot point repair, dust control, specialized cleaning and covering of soil with mulch.”

Chapter 54 is UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT which states how regulations of the sort that will guide the abatement of lead should be written.  The adopted regulations are not found.  It does refer to appeals of lead abatement orders 19a-229 (b) which I cannot find.

Not cited in the ORDER: Sec. 19a-110. (Formerly Sec. 19-65e). Report of lead poisoning. Parental notification. Availability of information regarding lead poisoning. (a) Not later than forty-eight hours after receiving or completing a report of a person found to have a level of lead in the blood equal to or greater than ten micrograms per deciliter of blood or any other abnormal body burden of lead, each institution licensed under sections 19a-490 to 19a-503, inclusive, and each clinical laboratory licensed under section 19a-30 shall report to (1) the Commissioner of Public Health, and to the director of health of the town, city or borough in which the person resides: (A) The name, full residence address, date of birth, gender, race and ethnicity of each person found to have a level of lead in the blood equal to or greater than ten micrograms per deciliter of blood or any other abnormal body burden of lead; (B) the name, address and telephone number of the health care provider who ordered the test; (C) the sample collection date, analysis date, type and blood lead analysis result; and (D) such other information as the commissioner may require, and (2) the health care provider who ordered the test, the results of the test. With respect to a child under three years of age, not later than seventy-two hours after the provider receives such results, the provider shall make reasonable efforts to notify the parent or guardian of the child of the blood lead analysis results. Any institution or laboratory making an accurate report in good faith shall not be liable for the act of disclosing said report to the Commissioner of Public Health or to the director of health. The commissioner, after consultation with the Commissioner of Administrative Services, shall determine the method and format of transmission of data contained in said report.

(b) Each institution or laboratory that conducts lead testing pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall, at least monthly, submit to the Commissioner of Public Health a comprehensive report that includes: (1) The name, full residence address, date of birth, gender, race and ethnicity of each person tested pursuant to subsection (a) of this section regardless of the level of lead in the blood; (2) the name, address and telephone number of the health care provider who ordered the test; (3) the sample collection date, analysis date, type and blood lead analysis result; (4) laboratory identifiers; and (5) such other information as the Commissioner of Public Health may require. Any institution or laboratory making an accurate report in good faith shall not be liable for the act of disclosing said report to the Commissioner of Public Health. The Commissioner of Public Health, after consultation with the Commissioner of Administrative Services, shall determine the method and format of transmission of data contained in said report.

(c) Whenever an institutional laboratory or private clinical laboratory conducting blood lead tests pursuant to this section refers a blood lead sample to another laboratory for analysis, the laboratories may agree on which laboratory will report in compliance with subsections (a) and (b) of this section, but both laboratories shall be accountable to insure that reports are made. The referring laboratory shall insure that the requisition slip includes all of the information that is required in subsections (a) and (b) of this section and that this information is transmitted with the blood specimen to the laboratory performing the analysis.

(d) The director of health of the town, city or borough shall provide or cause to be provided, to the parent or guardian of a child reported, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, with information describing the dangers of lead poisoning, precautions to reduce the risk of lead poisoning, information about potential eligibility for services for children from birth to three years of age pursuant to sections 17a-248 to 17a-248g, inclusive, and laws and regulations concerning lead abatement. Said information shall be developed by the Department of Public Health and provided to each local and district director of health. With respect to the child reported, the director shall conduct an on-site inspection to identify the source of the lead causing a confirmed venous blood lead level equal to or greater than fifteen micrograms per deciliter but less than twenty micrograms per deciliter in two tests taken at least three months apart and order remediation of such sources by the appropriate persons responsible for the conditions at such source. On and after January 1, 2012, if one per cent or more of children in this state under the age of six report blood lead levels equal to or greater than ten micrograms per deciliter, the director shall conduct such on-site inspection and order such remediation for any child having a confirmed venous blood lead level equal to or greater than ten micrograms per deciliter in two tests taken at least three months apart.


I copied the forms (included in the link above) and took them to the tenants advising them to call Robert Rubbo at (860) 489-0437 which is the number he called me on.  I told them Robert Rubbo had said he would help them.  


Robert Rubbo, MPH, Director of Health
Torrington Area Health District
350 Main St. – Suite A
Torrington, CT 06790

Telephone (860) 489-0436 I 482-9787 August 28, 2015
Dear sir,
Thank you for your phone calls today, and your offer to help my tenants. I have passed the forms for the LAMPP project that you sent me with your ORDER of August 18th on to them, as you asked me to do on the phone today. These forms are not meant for me and sending them with the ORDER was your mistake.
Also thank you for clarifying that you do not believe Connecticut General Statutes Sec. 19a-230 means I can be arrested even though it says “Any person who violates any provision of this chapter or any legal order of a director of health or board of health, for which no other penalty is provided, shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.”
You also said you believe the law requires you to issue the ORDER you wrote against me. It seems to me your obligation under the law is stated clearly in CGS Sec. 19a-111j (d)”A local health department’s educational services shall include the distribution of educational materials concerning lead poisoning prevention to the parent, legal guardian and the appropriate health care provider for each child with a confirmed blood lead level equal to, or greater than, ten micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood.” I see no other requirement under the law. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It may very well be true, as you say, that the LAMPP project is a good program. However I am not in a position to judge that. You promised to help my tenants with the program if they should decide it is advisable to do so. That is not my decision.

So let me be clear with you again, please do not enter my house without me present. I am very easy to find as you now know. My tenants and I are very concerned about lead found in their child’s blood. You have offered to help my tenants. I hope we can concentrate on that issue alone.

Also please give me copies of any data, reports or evidence that you have of hazardous materials in or near any of my houses. I would do the same for you.

Thank you for your kind attention. Kent Johnson 233 East Main Street Torrington, CT 06790 (860) 626-8486


September 2, 2015 I got more information from Robert Rubbo Link To Info


Posted in Book, Case Related, Economics, Incompetence, News, Stupid Laws | Leave a comment

Alternative Energy in the Real World

Social media, the news and the internet are all full of good hearts who believe cows or soccer balls or solar cells or bicycle generators or ocean, windmill or rain will solve our energy problems and quench our addiction forever. They believe a government investment will change the world.  But the science does NOT add up.

Personally I have installed solar panels and sky lights with lead acid batteries in the hopes of generating enough electricity to do something useful. But alas, unless you want to invest the money you will spend in a decade electric bills you can do no more than get a couple of lights and maybe a radio or TV.

Refrigerator? Only if you are very careful, or you have a physical ton of batteries.  The newer lithium are lighter but will still take up the space of a bedroom if you want to have a microwave.  Forget about a clothes dryer, air conditioner  or keeping warm in the winter with solar.

If the roof of a house in New England to the precise angles to  catch optimal winter sun how many solar panels will it take to power a microwave for one minute at night?

I have tried to do the math.  I hope someone tells me I am wrong, and my mat is all wet, but I believe you would need to devote 50 square feet of solar panel in full winter sunlight for an hour to provide enough power to run a microwave for one minute.  If anyone will check my math I would appreciate it.

I commented on a site devoted to living off-the-grid electrically and got lots of angry responses from people who have homes off the grid.  But if any of them had air conditioners or electric clothes dryers or microwaves they would not say so directly.  And they all lived in the sun belt, not in New England.

mainly depending on how many batteries you buy. I am not talking about five batteries, I am talking about 50 batteries or more….

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Connecticut 236 UTZ August 6, 2015 in Woodbury 7:30 AM

From a Facebook Post:
This asshole pulls up behind me 2 ft off my bumper on my way to work, passes me and 4 other cars in a row in the center of Woodbury with his lights on then turns them off. Gets stuck behind another car, stops her at a green light then passes her on the right and yells out his window as he drives thru the now red light. He then proceeded to drive lights off 60 thru Southbury to the State barracks. Must be ok to drive like an asshole in a State vehicle if your late to work. WTF??
  • Kent Johnson's photo.
  • Kent Johnson License Plate 236 UTZ

    Kent Johnson's photo.
    Like · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
  • Dale Hardisty I know a few guys that are cops and they are good dudes. But you get some assbags like this and it’s like wtf?
  • Kent Johnson Same goes for any group of people. Assholes come in all colors and all job descriptions. Sometimes the same people are good AND bad.
  • Kent Johnson But more than any other group, cops should be reported to the cops. 236 UTZ about 7:30 this morning in Woodbury
  • Dale Hardisty Unfortunately I was also running late for work so otherwise I would’ve definitely pulled in and said wtf man
    I would have bailed your out, Dale, and you would have given the cop a good reason to be late to work.  — Kent
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Global Warming: Both Sides are Wrong

The earth is warming about .05 degrees Celsius per decade and has warmed almost a full degree Celsius (or a total of about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit) since 1880 .  A large consensus of scientists estimate the average global temperature will increase 0.3 to 1.7 °C (0.5 to 3.1 °F) by 2099.   We can debate the amount of warming, but satellite data is pretty good.

It is a safe bet that SOME of the global warming is due to human activity. Test results have shown that human activity has caused local temperature increase, so we can only debate the amount of global warming that is due to human activity.  Other causes of global warming are solar activity and geological and volcanic emissions.  But here we will mainly discuss global warming due to human activity or our production of greenhouse gases.

Simply everyone believes natural global warming is somehow better than human-caused global warming.  The discussion of climate change centers on blaming humanity and not on artificial methods of global cooling.  Solutions proposed for global warming are necessarily highly contrived and unnatural.  For example, if the problem is global warming there are ways to cloud out sunlight to cool off the world using water vapor or a shade devices on a large scale on the earth surface or in space. These are not common proposals, however.

Whatever the cause of global warming, and the blame, and possible solutions, the discussion mostly centers on human production of greenhouse gases.  Most people recognize five greenhouse gases and  the most common greenhouse gas is water vapor.  Besides the possibility of unnaturally generating huge clouds of water vapor all over the earth to slow global warming there aren’t proposals concerning water vapor on a global scale.

Some people consider some synthetic gases produced only by humanity to be greenhouse gases.  This appears more to be the argument of what is or is not natural, and not many believe removing or generating more of these gases is a solution to global warming.  Regardless, the production of many of these gases has been dramatically slowed by environmental laws prohibiting their production

Although they are wrong, the overwhelming majority of those who advocate changing human behavior because of global warming make these assumptions:

1: Daily weather is changed by global warming.

2: Global warming and climate change are the same thing.

3: Colder than normal temperatures and extreme weather are related to global warming.

4: There are large groups of organized people who deny climate change.

5: If we all make small changes in our behavior such changes will mitigate global warming.

Predicting specific weather events is problematic, much less weekly or monthly trends.  Computer models are pretty good at getting the weather three days in advance, but not much more.  So even if our daily weather were changed by global warming there is no way to show what that change is.

Global warming is a fact, proved by using thermometers and mathematics. Climate change however is a difficult concept.  Whose climate and what change?  One can assert that warmer temperatures is a climate change itself but surely that is misleading.  Temperature is only one aspect of climate.

If our temperature has changed because of global warming then the temperature is therefore warmer.  To say that colder temperatures are brought to us by warming is a logical anomaly.  By what process does a warmer temperature make a colder temperature?  And it is not possible to have an informed opinion about whether or not extreme weather conditions have been brought by global warming without identifying the process or mechanism that brought the extreme weather.  I know of no such process or mechanism.

There are crackpots and unthinking public figures who make silly and outright stupid off-hand remarks daily.  There are others who try to shock and still others who think illogically.  Many do all three. But I know of no effort anywhere to hide the facts surrounding global warming.  There does seem to be a concerted effort, however, to make those who want to see those facts and understand the issues for themselves look foolish.  Citations available on request.

But the largest misconception we all face about global warming is that our individual actions may change the climate.  This is the issue at hand, and the complicated reasoning that makes nearly all of us misunderstand are the ideas that we will consider, beginning with the biggest of all:

Human generated carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas

Most of the efforts to mitigate climate change and global warming are aimed at reducing carbon emissions.  We understand that burning fuels adds carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.  It does not matter if the fuel is fossilized like coal or oil or recently grown like ethanol from corn.  There is a finite amount of carbon and the theory appears to be that the carbon is better buried under the ground than in the atmosphere.

We are told that trees take in carbon dioxide, which is true.  And when we burn those trees they give us back the carbon dioxide.  The most efficient way to keep the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere would be to bury the old growth (new growth takes more carbon from the atmosphere than old growth).

Any place that sequesters or removes carbon from the atmosphere is called a Carbon Sink.  Nearly 40% of all the carbon dioxide that is removed from the atmosphere is stored in the oceans, which makes the oceans the largest carbon sink on earth.  The .  This is causing Ocean Acidification and is thought to soon be responsible for the bleaching of coral reefs and causing repressing the metabolism of jumbo squid and  increasing the growth rate of seat star and shell plankton.

The other major carbon sink is underground as we said above.  Also when we remove trees to make lumber for construction we have removed or sequestered that carbon from the cycle.




Posted in Economics, Incompetence, News | Leave a comment

If You Are Not a Telemarketer Press ONE

If You Are Not a Telemarketer Press ONE

My sister had something like that 10 years ago.  She no longer has it and I don’t know why.  I did some shopping and apparently my answering machine is capable of doing something like that, but I have to let it ring through, which isn’t good for business.

So I called my phone company Frontier.  Spoke with a personable enough person who was not able to help me, so I suggested she bring it up at the next meeting.  Anyway she offered to look at my account to see if I could get a better deal so long as we were on the phone.  But she couldn’t because I needed to have the four digit code and I didn’t want to go to the filing cabinet.

So they called back with a robocall to ask if the representative was helpful, and of course I said no.  Then they had the long message, How could she have been more helpful   1 if she could have suggested a service….  So I pressed one, but it didn’t register that presumably because  I need to listen to all the options… 2 if she could have been more aware of my needs.  That’s it.  Press 2 and nothing happens of course so I wait, then it gets to five if Other is the option.  Then comes the clincher:

You can hear the options again if you need to.

Press the number key.

Okay, so maybe that is clear.  Maybe I shouldn’t have hit the number key, but I did, and it started the five part message all over again.  So I hung up.



Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

I Like Drugs – A Libertarian View

Many countries allow limited access to recreational drugs and their societies have not collapsed.  Some countries  hardly regulate drugs and alcohol at all and we may say those countries are lawless, but no countries have evident, systemic problems related to unregulated, open and conspicuous drug and alcohol use.

We all freely admit that it is very easy for some people to find illegal drugs in the USA which makes it difficult to argue our laws against recreational drug use have any effect on society beyond astronomical costs to taxpayers.   No reasonable people are arguing to make drugs MORE illegal.  It is time to talk about making them less illegal.

Drug addiction can destroy families as well as individuals and the laws we have are not helping those families. The war on drugs also has untold victims and costs to all of us even if we don’t use drugs.  Families are torn apart when our relations are imprisoned and every sector of society has those who avoid authorities because of their own drug use or the drug use of someone close to them. Racism and bigotry is tied to drug use because “they” use drugs but not “us” so all of “them” are bad, a very common racist motif.  International relations and immigration are complicated because families all over the world are accused and generalized as drug smugglers because drug smugglers bring drugs to the USA from every other country.

The war on drugs has NOT limited the availability of illegal drugs in the US.  We all know we are losing a very expensive war.  Moreover most of us can admit that our efforts to criminalize drug use have not curtailed addictions, eliminated overdoses or stopped other drug related damage to society.  It can be easily shown that restricting access to drugs legally will do much more to limit the availability of drugs than to pass a law that too many people ignore.  If we register drug users we will do much better than if we continue to imprison drug users.

I am not advocating drug use.  I am advocating a libertarian attitude toward drug use.  I do not know more than you what drugs you or anyone else should take.  I don’t believe any medical doctor has that sort of knowledge either.  Beyond the effects of drugs, and their dosages, which anyone can find from multiple sources these days, a doctor does not have any other magic information.  I believe any person can study and learn and live with and some might say benefit from occasional  recreational drug use.  Although I believe medical doctors and the science of medicine can tell people a lot about drugs and their effects I do not believe the medical profession should have a monopoly on the right people have to treat and use their own bodies.

We need to re-examine making criminals of recreational drug users.  And we also need to re-examine the underlying reasons for the war on drugs.  Logic and science tell us that alcohol and marijuana and aspirin as well as lots of herbal remedies and over-the-counter drugs are as dangerous in many ways as illegal drugs.  Although is it true that opiates are more addictive than alcohol most other common and/or popular drugs do not cause a physical dependency.  The main danger to oneself or others with non-opioid abuse is strange behavior and/or overdose or psychological dependence.

Our government is NOT the only or the best way to regulate drug use.  But the government war on drugs makes our government very expensive with policing and imprisoning illegal drug users.

People pay a lot of money and take huge legal risks to obtain and use recreational drugs.  Families are the main line of defense against addiction, not the government.  It is the family that can reach an addict much better than police or our educational systems mostly because an illegal drug user will avoid authorities to avoid prison.  But even without a family to reach our addicts, prison is the worst solution available to get help to a non-violent drug addict.

Since the beginning of humanity people have used drugs of all kinds for all kinds of purposes.  In the case of the war on drugs in the US we are talking about SOME kinds of drugs that are used recreationally, like alcohol and marijuana.  And what I want to propose is that all drugs can be useful for lots of reasons, and there is no reason any more for full scale war on drugs.



Posted in Book, Case Related, Economics, Incompetence, News | Leave a comment

Global Warming Doesn’t Mean Climate Change!

To say that global warming causes a specific weather event is like saying someone robbed a bank because of poverty.  Moreover we don’t know if the person who robbed the bank was poor. If global warming is climate change then raising prices is inventory change, and gaining weight is health change.

So far as I know there are two real, large, verifiable and widely accepted scientific studies that show undeniable and factual evidence of global warming.  One of those studies shows very strong statistical evidence of human interference as a cause of warming a specific area of the USA.  There is no need to cite those studies here since the science is widely accepted.  So much is the science accepted that millions of people ridicule anyone who even appears to question that science.

To be clear, I am not questioning the science, I am questioning the widely held beliefs of lay people.  These people do not know or care about the science.  They just know global warming is affecting their lives and their weather today, even though the science is not clear.  Further the ridicule and disdain these lay people show to those of us who think for ourselves is ironic.  Those who ridicule are the stupid ones, and their ridicule is harmful to humanity.

Obviously throughout global history this earth has experienced climate change.  There is a well-accepted theory of a mini-ice age that was over about 1800 AD, but is coming back soon due to increased sun spot activity.  I don’t think scientists are blaming human activity for sun spots.  But there is evidence of human interference with global temperature.  There is only inference and innuendo that such interference has caused, is causing or will cause climate change.

Mini ice age in the news.

Yes the polar ice is melting, yes the Pacific Ocean is warmer, yes temperature averages around the globe in most areas have gone up, especially night time temperatures.  But where is the causal relationship between the temperature change and a weather event?  Many scientists predict weather events will be more severe and more frequent.  But data on such storms, at least very accurate data, are from satellites and those have only been a reliable source of data since about 1979.  That doesn’t say anything about our storms 50 years ago or more.

I am not denying global warming or climate change.  But to ridicule people for questioning data that does not exist is a common pass time among the uneducated majority.  The correct scientific answer “we don’t know” is an answer that will get you ridiculed if you say it in public.  “Of course we know”, they say.  “Of course this snow fall is due to global warming”.  “Anyone who questions the evidence is denying global warming”, they say.  Not so, there is no such evidence.  There is good evidence for global warming, but not for climate change.

A Cyclone in the Pacific is not due to global warming.  Well.  Maybe, but probably not.  Most years there are cyclones in the Pacific regardless of global temperature.  So, to say that such a weather event is due to global warming is a stretch.  But saying what I just said in many circles is enough to bring ridicule upon you.  And those who say “yes well of course the cyclone is due to global warming” are the same people who will say that a bank robber chose to rob a bank because of poverty.

He or she might have been poor, might have been influenced by poverty, but then again maybe not.  “We don’t know” is the best answer we have.  But “we don’t know” is not a satisfying answer, so we just make up an answer that might be true.  “It must have been poverty.”  And the cyclone must be global warming.  And those of us who want to understand the situation better are worthy of ridicule.

Posted in Book, Economics, Incompetence, News | Leave a comment

Bisexual Intolerance – A New Viewpoint

A person who is bisexual is not necessarily a good or bad person.  A person who questions what is a bisexual is not a good or bad person.  Bringing up the subject of what is a bisexual is uncomfortable, and I will be blamed for talking about uncomfortable subjects.  Long ago it was not considered politic or dignified to talk about sex.  Now it is front page news and no one seems to state in open terms why it is important.

The new governor of Oregon, Kate Brown is “openly bisexual”.   Open minded people believe such a declaration means she must be a good person and her sex life is none of our business.  In the olden days people did not talk about such things and no one openly declared what kind of sex they prefer. Mostly we are grateful she has not provided details of precisely what she means when she declares her sexual preferences in public.

No matter how liberal, conservative, open minded or reasonable we see ourselves we all, in the past and in the present, arrive at a point of shock, shame or  silence when we fully examine the implications of publicly declaring details of  our sex lives out loud.  There are some details we don’t want to hear. What does a bisexual do, exactly?

You are about to be challenged and possibly angered by what I have written. Our prejudices are partisan and only reason may sway an opinion.  My personal prejudices are not the issue, nor are the terms I choose to express the striking nature of public sex discussions.  With open debate about marriage and family there are many new questions,  which are strikingly similar to the old questions.  All of us who examine our minds and hearts  eventually examine sexual preferences and prejudices, definitions and preconceptions and we all know that someone’s sexual preference should not influence our judgement as to whether or not they are good people.

It may be human nature to make a decision on a topic like tolerance or acceptance of gay, lesbian, bisexual people, and not examine the topic in detail.  We avoid talking about details of sex. Perhaps we are very tolerant of all kinds of sexual expression. But we have ideas of what kind of sex we tolerate and what kinds we find distastefully deviant. I do not suggest that there is any relation between, say, homosexuality and rape but we universally condemn rape as we almost universally condemned homosexuality some 50 years ago.

Perhaps we have generalized our racism to cover sexism.  Perhaps we know in our minds that people cannot control their race and race is not an indicator of character or intelligence, therefore sex isn’t important either.  Do we want to study intelligence and character of homosexuals and bisexuals the way we study racial differences?

Again, in the olden days people publicly named a gay person and called to mind our own worst prejudices, most often with a negative connotation on what we ourselves consider deviant. Often we deal with those prejudices internally and express our support for people who are different from us by virtue of certain catch words: gay, lesbian, straight, bisexual…  And with those catch-words we often gloss over what each of those words means.  We may think we know what rape means, and we use hyphenated pseudo definitions like date-rape and statutory-rape.  But when someone says they are bisexual, what does that mean, exactly?

With media saturation and the faces of gays openly in our lives and in the media we may have thought more than earlier generations about our prejudices.  Certainly the vast majority of us have separated gay from universally maligned deviant sexual behavior like pederasty, rape, bestiality,  polygamy, prostitution and open marriage.   Sexual tourism to countries where prostitution is legal, a long list of options on the internet for porn and/or “hook-ups” and other sexual meetings without regard to legality or gender or specific acts are easily available for all to see.  We may be  further revising our ideas of deviant sex.  We may believe anything short of rape and pederasty should be permitted in the privacy of one’s home.  Or perhaps we more conservatively believe that prostitution and adultery also should be condemned.

From time to time one reads headlines about a sex act by a prominent individual, Adam Kuhn, Vance McAllister, Ken Mehlman, Ryan Loskam and Robert Decheine just in recent memory.  Perhaps we have thought deeply about our own views and prejudices and know how we stand on each issue, that, for example  prostitution is not so bad, and bestiality is okay but not pederasty. The aim of this article is to help you examine what you do and don’t accept when you support LBG rights.

In previous discussions with several people I have pushed the idea that when someone “comes out” as a bisexual that means that person has sex with both sexes. I have met with lots of resistance to such a shocking proposal. Do we really accept a politician and lawyer who has sex with both sexes?  Maybe it is not so shocking, that perhaps a bisexual is attracted to both sexes but doesn’t have sex. Perhaps we are willing to accept a bisexual who is attracted to both sexes but does not act on that attraction.

Or perhaps we really think it is okay whatever someone does with other people sexually even outside the bounds of marriage.  Perhaps we have arrived at a point in society where marriage is a secular and not sacred institution and those politicians who transgress the bounds of marriage may do so without fear of voter reprisals.  We can  rationalize or ignore but there is no longer the option of days of yore to condemn without further examination. We may condemn but at your personal peril.  You will be called to task on your condemnation.  What precisely is the line you will not allow others to cross?

Today we have bisexual politicians, or at least one, in one of the highest political offices of the land. This bisexual might be married heterosexually and then we might say it is okay to be bisexual but if you are married then you shouldn’t have sex outside of the marriage. Someone who truly accepts bisexuality would accept threesomes and open marriages and orgies. Perhaps those of us who support bisexual rights can also support polygamy.

This all began with the contention that homosexuality is natural.  I think we can all agree that attraction to the opposite sex is innate, like an instinct. I think there is enough evidence to support a contention that in many cases people are born with a strong predilection toward homosexuality.  But who wants to put forth the proposition openly that homosexual attractions are  similar to a bisexual attraction, an attraction to young boys, or a sexual attraction to animals?

Such shocking questions need to be addressed eventually. Or perhaps such questions are not at all shocking once we have accepted the LBG premise that such couplings are only natural.   Evidence of the use of adolescent boys for sexual pleasure exist in every society in which a historical record exists, as does disgust for such practices. Bestiality is outlawed everywhere in the world if only under animal abuse laws, but no one believes the practice has been wiped out. Kinsey reports  8% of men and nearly 4% of women have had such a cross species encounter.  Kinsey reports 40% or more of people who live on farms have had such sex, but those numbers are disputed.

Posted in Book, Incompetence, News, Stupid Laws | 6 Comments

Does Islam Think?

Institutional Islam does not want to take sides for or against the Islamic Terrorists and the Islamic Extremists.  Islam teaches that the world will one day be all Muslim and Islam does not want to hinder the process, even though the process is bloody.

You will not see Institutional Islam, and by that I mean the Imams and Mullahs and the leaders of the larger more influential Mosques of the Muslim world would say Islam believes in the rights of non-Muslims, that there can be no forced or false conversion to Islam, that everyone of whatever religion has basic human rights and cannot be forced to follow Islam or Islamic law…  In other words, if Islam taught peaceful co-existence the war on terror would be over.

Institutional Islam must know this simple fact.  Islam is the problem and only tolerance and peace is the solution.  The simple platitudes are not enough.  Every child in Islamic school is taught the error of Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and the Baha’i Faith.  There is no doubt in any Muslim’s mind that non-Muslims are wrong about religion.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment