climate-gate (3)



Dear Jimmy, 

              Writing from the U.S.A.

I’ve used Wikipedia countless times and recommended it to many friends as well.  So . . . the natural question is WHY am I NOT contributing at this time?  In a nutshell, the answer is that I love 92% of Wikipedia content, but know for a fact that at least 8-9% is deliberately made up and maintained untrustworthy.  What do I mean?  I mean that it is verifiably slanted toward bucking up popular left-wing causes rather than showing high-fidelity toward verifiable truth.  I’ve talked to many friends and associates who, like me conclude that Wikipedia does NOT allow any factual contributions that belie left-wing  “truths”  whose science or history is “already decided and beyond controversy.”  I’ve had six entire contributions items of this nature disappear from Wikipedia out of 13 or so contributions to these six items.

For now, two items illustrating what I mean are 1) my information on Greenland which Wikipedia has totally rejected in favor of the LIE that Greenland was never GREEN even during the 300 year Medieval Optimum:   I refer you to the dvd from the Little Ice Age, Big Chill which shows real science in operation as well as real history which is apparently NOT GOOD ENOUGH for because it’s about 88% out-of-sync with leftist politics and their desire to create worldwide carbon taxation which, naturally enough requires pretty much a totalitarian state to efficiently pull off . . . and 2) The fact that Wikipedia used to have contributions on global-warming and climate-change(haven’t looked at them over the last seven years) which reinforce the LIE that “99% of reputable scientists back this claim.  I could off-hand refute that contention with 15 or 16 facts.  I refer you to:  IF the 99% figure were accurate, in America alone 3,148,700 scientists would have weighed in backing global warming with 902,900 of them holding doctorate degrees . . . not to mention the important fact for anyone who respects science . . . that consensus has absolutely no import in science . . . ZERO import.  I think you need to have one article and only one article on the subject:  “The Global Warming Controversy.”

Here’s a quick rundown/outline of crucial arguments against the VALIDITY of global warming conjecture.  And, Jimmy, IF you know anything about science and have any respect for it . . . you appreciate the fact that like consensus . . . even 100% validity in most cases proves nothing as far as ultimate truth.  As Aristotle, the man who literally invented logic with his square of logical opposition, told us . . . IF all the premises themselves are true; and the argument is entirely valid, then and only then can we say that truth has been shown.  OK, a brief “hit list” suggesting strongly that global-warming is what we Americans call “B.S.”

1.        The hottest 300 year period in the last 2,500 years (the Medieval Optimum was deliberately omitted from the calculations.

2.       The Little Ice Age that followed the Medieval Optimum, was totally included naturally enough since its inclusion appears to weigh heavily for the theory of man-caused global warming.

3.       In the November, 2009 revelation by many British newspapers of a conspiracy to push the global warming narrative which was named “Climate Gate”; and was based upon some 786,000 e-mails and documents, I believe, your CRU (Climate Research Unit) in Cardiff and the U.N. International Panel on Climate Change were implicated for pseudo-science at best and a conspiracy to silence dissenting valid facts and opinion and sway the world of the university and scientific magazines in doing so.

4.       In particular the narrative supporting the “hockey-stick” phenomena was totally debunked.

5.       Don’t many of you in Britain call militant environmentalists “Mean-Greenies” and/or dyed-in-the-wool statist politicos “Watermelons” “Green on the outside; but red or pink on the inside”) denoting the desire of ultra-socialist and even communist interests to take advantage of the “need for” ever-expanding government and ever-diminishing individual freedoms in order to tax carbon?

6.       Here in the United States the chief proselytizers of the politics of Global-Warming were the same people (John Holdren, for instance, President Obama’s “Green Czar) who from 1972 - 1977 were all over the newspapers and magazines (especially our Time Magazine) pushing the imminent probability of “GLOBAL COOLING?”  And most importantly this group was pushing (in college texts) all sort of draconian population control measures including but not limited to:  forced abortions; forced sterilizations; sterilization agents in the public drinking water; and even policies akin to the Red Chinese now-discredited one-child per family law which among other problems, has thrown the normal gender ratio all out of whack!

7.       And most obviously, all the dire predictions of Al Gore etc. (All the world’s glaciers such as Kilimanjaro’s all melted off by 2015; New Orleans, portions of Florida, an a goodly chunk of the USA’s Atlantic seaboard under water) have not come close to being accurate.  If anything TRUE scientists tend to err on the side of conservative-estimates rather than trying to use sensationalist claims such as those of 1972 and 2004 made by Coming-Ice Agers; and Global Warming advocates.  Again, my observations are NOT all science, but they are all true.  So IF my premises are correct that . . .

A.      Global warming caused by human intervention is NOT proven science because the methods and people involved have NOT been objective and circumspect. 

B.      Much evidence indicates strong involvement of agents of political-correctness on the YEA side which happens to coincide with that side’s long and militant history of advocating causes that require large collectivist governments such as those once found in all the 38 communist governments responsible during the period 1917 -2010, I believe, for 132 million democides (peace-time deaths of citizens caused by a regime’s INcompetence  or oppression or just plain murder) . . . again indicating far less than an objective environment compatible with real science.

C.      So:  the notion that all good people and smart people and most importantly 99% of all scientists have rationally and logically and scientifically concluded after adequate demonstration/experiment that man-caused global warming is a fact is NOT valid and cannot yet be proven true, if EVER.

   Then:  global warming, far from being settled science . . . is not yet worthy of the name "science."

I’m hoping against hope given my earlier encounters with science* on Wikipedia, that I’m talking to a logical man interested in science and truth. Good luck to you.  I’ll be a contributor when the problems I’ve described are virtually eradicated.  Good luck.

Robert VanDeHey


**I refer you also to your own wikipedia article on Karl Popper, the most famous and, I believe, the wisest philosopher of science in history and a man who started out as a communist and ultimately left that creed and become a firm advocate of individual freedom which he concluded years afterward was incompatible with socialism, believe it or not.

*     *     *     *     *

One thing I didn't mention to Jimmy is that when America added Earth Day to the calendar we were not only following an environmental tradition begun in the old Soviet Union in the mid-1950's but also beginning that tradition here on the  anniversary of the birthday of Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov aka LENIN, but doing so on his 100th anniversary (he was born April 22, 1870 according to modern calendars rather than the czarist ones . . . what a shocking coincidence, eh?  Most environmentalist probably do not know that connection, but you can damn well bet their progressive leaders sure as hell do!

Ya'all live long, strong and ornery,





Read more…


Europe Rejects Global-Warming,
But Many Americans Believe Gore
And Liberal Media Totally Refuses
Climate-Gate Story Coverage
                Oh what a difference the Atlantic Ocean makes . . . roughly two years after Al Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize for his “documentary” pseudo-pscience-FICTION work “An Inconvenient Truth” (the film also won an Oscar from the Hollywood crowd), European newspapers and television became awash in the revelations of the Climate-Gate Scandal (see link #1 above). Very quickly the embarrassing frauds and cover-ups and phony pscience pshenanigans drove Europe, which had been far more gung-ho about man-caused global warming than America, into a solidly sensibly refusal to honor environmental extremism in any way, shape or form. 
Today Europeans call environmental extremists and ecotage advocates “mean-greenies” and “watermelons” (green on the outside but pink or even RED on the inside . . . meaning they are mere pretenders at environmentalism who use the contrived global warming scenario in hopes of instituting greater socialistic and even communistic-type totalitarian regimes); and carbon-trading or cap-and-trade schemes there are all but dead. Of course, Global-Warming is still a big argument on this side of the Atlantic where the liberal-mainstream media considers the East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit’s (CRU) scandalous behavior a non-story and continues to support Al Gore’s lies. The second and third link above gives the details of how CRU deliberately omitted data from the warmest 350 years in recent history (a time when Greenland was indeed Green; when the Vikings could settle there and even push on to explore North America: a time called the Medieval Warm Period. 
When you eliminate records of the warmest 350 years in a 2,500 year study you’re definitely going to get an average temperature for the earth that is much cooler than the real honest average. That’s the kind of people that are pushing the global-warming agenda . . . corrupt politicians and corrupt scientists.
                For Al Gore and about 60 of his well-known progressive**cronies (including but definitely NOT limited to Franklin Raines, Hillary and Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Joel Rogers, Richard Sandor, John Ayers, George Soros, Valerie Jarret, the head men at Goldman-Sachs, etc., etc. ad nauseum all up to their eye-teeth involved in CCX, the Chicago Climate eXchange) the Climate-Gate scandal was a monstrous personal financial disaster that prevented them from pocketing hundreds of Billion$$$ and even TRillion$$$. With all their influence in Europe gone seemingly overnight, the difficulties caused by the 2009 U.S. Senate’s refusal to ratify a Cap and Trade bill, earlier passed in Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives by five votes, brought about the elimination of CCX entirely – almost ten years work and scheming down the drain.
Nevertheless multi-billionaire currency-manipulator George Soros (“The man who broke the Bank of England”) and his toady Barack Obama soldier on striving for greater federal government control of our natural resources. How? By seeking to use presidential-regulatory fiat via the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to eliminate the entire coal industry and virtually handcuff the petroleum industry in America. If you’ll examine the last two links above, you’ll hear Barack Obama’s interview with the San Francisco Chronicle in which he promised to bankrupt the coal industry and that his policies “will necessarily cause the price of electricity to sky-rocket.” The Chronicle did NOT publish this story and the mainstream-lamestream media has sat on it unwilling to tell Americans the truth for over three years now. The EPA, then, is Barack Obama’s tool for carrying out those two stupid and evil promises. Right now the coal industry which provides the power that gives us 49% of our electricity is under fire from the EPA and some American coal mines and some American coal-fired power plants are already being forced toward bankruptcy. Not only Millions of jobs, but also Billions of dollar$$$ in increased electrical bills are at stake.
Al Gore came within a whisker of becoming the world’s first “green Billionaire,” with a B, despite having a personal ‘carbon-footprint’^^ the size of Las Vegas:  including three huge mansions (the last one in California cost over $8 Million) and two private jets. Barack Obama, however as he revealed in his first autobiography Dreams from My Father is a communist son of a communist father who, in his only known published writing, shows a heavy interest in 100% taxation, government seizing land and business, and government controlling all aspects of the economy. 
Barack Obama is driven toward higher goals than mere money and mere power. Barack Obama believes in the necessity, efficacy and benefit of Totalitarian Communism just as his father did. He is a “watermelon” . . . pretending interest in green activity on the outside to further socialistic and communistic aims that lie deep within his heart. Our liberal media is now committed to advancing Obama’s re-election campaign as they did his original election . . . and to advancing the progressive agenda no matter what the cost to America and to her people. Americans are being denied the information necessary to make intelligent decisions by the media which thinks they, like Obama, know more about what’s good for us, than we ourselves do. Inform your friends and neighbors and every intelligent voter you can find, this “movement” for global-warming is a red herring for total government control. But, first, do NOT trust me. Do not trust the greenies, read the links above, get all the information you can find and make an informed evaluation of where exactly the truth in this matter lies.## 
Ya’ll live long, strong and ornery,
** Progressivism is the doctrine that we must “progress” beyond the “ill-conceived and outdated U.S. Constitution” if we are to ever make “progress” toward an earthly Utopia.
^^ Of course carbon dioxide is vital to life on this planet including creating our oxygen and even is crucial for the production of rain. When CO2 is low, droughts ensue.
## Rajjpuut recently wrote a blog on the 13 most dangerous items ever published
the part of that article which might shock you is that counting down from #13 to #1, the single most dangerous thing ever published in Rajjpuut’s not-so-humble opinion was: 
   The book: Silent Spring by Rachel Carson  
Whatever was said about global warming pseudo-pscientific pshenanigans is true in spades about environmental “research” into products that keep humanity safe . . . such as DDT.
While the verdict is still out on whether Cap and Trade legislation or regulatory edict will take hold and cripple America’s economy, Ms. Carson has quietly passed Jack the Ripper, Ted Bundy, the Cuban combo of Castro and Che Guevara, Pol Pot, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao to move onto the throne as the all-time #1 mass murderer. She did it with her little science-FICTION book masquerading as real science:  Silent Spring. Despite documenting no actual science, Ms. Carson was able to practically create the extremist wing of the environmental movement single-handedly; and to influence the American government and the United Nations to institute a worldwide ban on DDT, the most effective and most harmless insecticide ever created.
By 1972, deaths from just one tropical mosquito-borne disease, malaria, had dropped to 41,400 worldwide. Now and for virtually every single one of the 38 years since the DDT ban took effect malaria deaths stand at roughly 2.1 million yearly, not to mention the even greater number of surviving millions who will now spend every third day of their life suffering the ravages of malaria’s fever. All told, considering all the nine deadly tropical diseases dramatically reduced using DDT which are now running rampant, Ms. Carson has killed about 98 million people.
Rajjpuut has been told about a showman who purportedly would drink DDT as tea and also use it as salad dressing. The safety of the substance is seen in the fact that it was sprayed directly upon U.S. servicemen in World War II; and upon their clothing and tents; and that today many African nations are starting to avoid the DDT ban and use DDT again – their favorite way? They spray their huts inside and out three times yearly.
Despite Ms. Carson’s undocumented claims of testing, no human has ever been proved to have developed cancer from DDT exposure; no animals with fewer than six legs has ever been shown to have been harmed by DDT; and DDT has never been shown to actually make birds’ eggshells thinner: QED.  But lack of DDT, definitely kills 2.1 million people a year. As Hippocrates said, “First do NO HARM.”
Speaking of harm . . . although the Climate-Gate scandal wasn’t uncovered in Europe until early November, 2009, in March of 2009 the British Parliament published its results into an investigation of the East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) and man-caused global-warming. The progressives in control of Parliament at that time did their best to hide the real meat of the investigation. In volume two of the report, there is a memorandum submitted as evidence from Lord Lawson of Blaby, chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which was in response to four very significant questions from the investigating committee. This memo confirms the claims by many global warming skeptics that the scientists at CRU were trying to hide data and silence the skeptics. The questions asked by the investigative committee are as follows:
(i) Have the CRU scientists been manipulating the raw surface temperature data in a way that is less than wholly objective and dispassionate?
(ii) Have they refused dissenting scientists and/or other outsiders with a bona fide interest in global warming access to the raw data, contrary to the proper canons of scientific research and to the demands of scientific integrity?
(iii) Have they been improperly seeking to avoid answering Freedom of information Act requests?
(iv) Have they actively sought to prevent papers by dissenting scientists, statisticians, or other informed commentators from being peer-reviewed and/or published, again contrary to the proper canons of scientific research and to the demands of scientific integrity?
Lord Lawson's response to these questions is damning:
“We believe that there is compelling evidence both independent of the leaked email exchanges and arising from those emails to suggest that the answers to (ii), (iii) and (iv) above are clearly 'yes'.”
However, Lord Lawson chooses his words more carefully in answering the smoking-gun question at the top of the list: “Moreover, we are disturbed by the CRU scientists' treatment of the so-called divergence problem. That is the fact that, for that period of time where both a proxy global temperature series and a recorded global temperature series are available, the two series markedly diverge. This clearly suggests either that the proxy series is unreliable or that the recorded series is unreliable (or possibly both: the point is that they cannot both be true). The CRU scientists' attempt to hide the problem by concealing the divergence demonstrates, we believe, a lack of integrity.”
If this study had been taken seriously in Europe there’s a good chance that Climate-Gate would have happened many, many months earlier. If it and the Climate-Gate scandal had been reported here (as well as Barack Obama’s, Al Gore’s and George Soros’ conflict of interest with regard to CCX) in America, there’s a good chance that our economy would now be humming again as Congress responded to the American people’s awareness and disgust with Washington corruption on energy and the environment. As American Thinker tells us, “Integrity is at the very heart of the Man-Caused GW debate -- not just the integrity of the discredited scientists involved, but also the integrity of the data used by the CRU. For many years, the global warming skeptics have been citing that the differing data sets are not in agreement and have asked the simple question "why?" Their assertion has always been that until a scientific explanation for the differences is found, there can be no definitive conclusion concerning M-CGW. This question was always avoided by the now-discredited Dr. Jones, who headed up the CRU. But finally, some light has been shed onto the question of integrity of the data.”
By the way, in the United States the cost of carbon-trading tax legislation would reach $10 Trillion yearly or 40% of the economy without producing a good or service. Since the entire real economy is worth only $15 Trillion that means that costs of all other goods and services would rise 67% with the profits going to Gore and his cronies ($10 TR/$15 TR = 67%). Nevertheless Gore and his buddy George Soros are still pushing global warming and carbon trading via the United Nations and Soros’ lackey Barack Obama has pledged to comply with whatever programs the U.N. comes up with. 
Read more…

Hyphenated “-Science” is Always Humbuggery

In the movie “Planet of the Apes” the human astronaut Taylor sneers at the Oran-gu-tan Dr. Zaius “Minister of Science-Defender of the faith” for the obvious conflict of interest his two different occupational ‘hats’ implied. Through the first two million years of human existence, scientific and technological advances were as much a matter of serendipity and luck as they were of clear thinking. This was the time of imagined “big medicine” and “magic powers” and church and state and science were all jumbled up together ineffectively. Even with the dawn of civilization (villages, towns and cities become possible because of the rise of agriculture), the shaman, witchdoctor etc. were still in their heyday. Throughout much of the European dark ages, outside of Iberia (the Moors ruled the Iberian Peninsula for almost eight centuries which is why the Portuguese and Spanish were the most advanced civilizations and the first to make voyages to Asia and the New World), Europe’s learning and culture were basically all in the hands of the clergy and very few noble’s much less common-folk could read and write. While pagans like the Greeks knew the world was round, the Christian/
Catholic authorities insisted upon a strict biblical interpretration with the entire universe orbitting the earth. Religion (theo-science) has NEVER been a good foundation for science.

Indeed, theo-science has routinely embarassed itself and retarded human advance. Eco-science and Big Guv-sci have done no better. Up to today two million unnecessary deaths from malaria have occurred. The culprits? Rachel Carlson’s pseudo-science novel “Silent Spring” and the alarmist environmentalists and the politicians who went along with her nonsense. DDT supposedly made bird eggshells thinner. DDT supposedly caused human cancer. DDT supposedly hurt fish, amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal life. Not one of those "supposedlies" is true, NOT ONE. To date the only proven knock on DDT is that it burns your eyes if you don’t close them and get in close contact to the spray. Whereas only 40,000 died worldwide from malaria in 1970, every year now five million plus malaria deaths occur. And yet, DDT can be safely drunk; DDT can be safely used as salad dressing. No harm has ever been shown to the Africans who routinely twice a year fogged their houses with DDT . . . until, they were denied the DDT and confronted with malaria, that is. Today several African countries have begun to ignore the DDT ban with excellent results. Like the DDT alarmism, global-warming alarmism is hysterical pseudo-science, nothing more.

Right now the mainstream media in the United States have willfully NOT reported this story:

which twelve days after the fact was run in the ulta-liberal London Times while that paper checked the event called “Climate-Gate” over very carefully. Today, six and a half months later, the story is unknown still to many Americans. Barack Obama has passed his Cap and Trade bill in the house of representatives and is trying to sneak it through the Senate much as he did Obamacare earlier. Even before counting inflation from the policies of Obama and the federal reserve, Cap and Trade would increase prices on everything in the economy, every product and service, by an average of 67%**. The destruction of the U.S. economy is literally at stake. And, why? Again because of eco-pseudo-big-guv-science.

One of the infamous climate-gate e-mails said, “The fact is we can’t account for the cooling at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t,” according to Kevin Trenberth in a letter to other climate alarmists. That is, the “obvious truth of global-warming” wasn’t showing up in their readings.

You’ll recall that Obama “science-czar” John Holdren was predicting an ice age in 1972 . . . before his recent shift to global-warming activism. So which is it? Probably . . . neither. The real scientists doing real science have been talking about something they call “PDO” which not surprisingly relates to the cooling trend evident since the late 1990’s that has the global-warming alarmists so alarmed. PDO stands for “Pacific Decadal Oscillation” which is just a fancy term for the fact that both weather and its longer-term fluctuations (climate) owe their existence to our oceans and particularly to the Pacific Ocean and surprise, surprise, the Pacific ocean patterns vary (oscillate) in 30-40 year patterns which are not yet understood.

All this has vindicated the skeptical scientists who have denied that global-warming was a fact . . . such as the almost 32,000 American Scientists including over 9,000 with Ph.D.s who signed the petition linked here:

Steve Milloy (editor and founder of says the problem is that real science was never done by global-warming alarmists. For example, they deliberately left out about four hundred years of the Medieval Warming Period in their calculations. They based everything on models they mocked up to prove that global-warming was real. “The models are in error.” Right now while Europe has accepted climategate as real and discarded global-warming, the same climate models are still being used by American global-warming alarmist to rationalize expansive and expensive regulatory gimmicks cooked up by the progressive ultra-left wing of the Democrats and Republicans.

“We’ve had no warming for the past 10-15 years, even though carbon dioxide emissions have increased,”Milloy noted. “The upper atmosphere should be warming at a much greater rate than the lower atmosphere but this is not happening. It means that we just don’t understand energy flows, and if you don’t understand how something works it cannot be accurately modeled. It’s insanity to go forward with regulations that are not based on something we understand, but that’s what is being proposed.”

It’s all about the money, Phil Jones of East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) took in “23 million dollars of public funds to fudge their data and the Club of Rome in their time took in as much.” The Club of Rome was a late 60’s disaster-alarmist group that was supposedly composed of the “most eminent scientists in the world.” Both the global-warming folks and the Club of Rome are still operating right now even though they’ve both been largely discredited in the scientific world as charlatans. David Berlinski, a senior fellow with The Discovery Institute, laments what he calls “Big-Science” that’s all about the money with little respect for truth . . . . “Big Science in its natural (corrupt) state,” it is not exactly new, laments Berlinski, “In the 1970s, the Club of Rome was on everyone’s lips with their hysterical warnings of mass disasters that were shortly to arrive. My first book, On Systems Analysis, which I wrote for the MIT press, was an expose and a denunciation of the kind of stuff then current. I cannot see that anything has changed. Then as now, the people doing the hustle were doing it for money.

Returning to global-warming, Berlinski added, “The overwhelming consensus is, as it always is, utter nonsense because it is in the first place an illusion: There are very many scientists who dissent from global warming. And it is utter nonsense because it is based on nothing more than a trend line. No one has the faintest idea what the trend represents or whether it will continue or whether even the trend itself was based on data so fudged as to be meaningless. The latter, I think.

“What is at work deep down is a delusion as striking as various Zulu beliefs and no more credible: To wit, that because there is something that might for the sake of convenience be designated as the global atmosphere, there is as well a science of the global atmosphere (GA), one in which for various initial conditions of the GA, laws of its evolution might be adduced from which explanations and predictions would flow. There is no such science; there are no such laws. To be sure one can say with easy confidence that the GA is determined by fundamental physics.

“Climate science stands exposed but only for the moment,” he wrote. “It will be back. I cannot see much difference between evolutionary science and climate science and I have no expectation that the winds of dissent will ever blow from the one to the other. Why should they? In just the past few years, large scale econometric models have, once again, been shown to be unreliable and intellectually worthless. The world-wide economy tanked and not one — not one! — econometric model predicted it.”

Berlinsky, is famed for standing fast in his dissenting views. For example, he is a severe skeptic of evolution as originally penned by Darwin but not an advocate of ID, intelligent design. Berlinsky believes scientists ought to be able to stand up tall and say, “so far, we just don’t really understand what’s going on!”

Of course, (or is that “OF CURSE?”) global warming is still the accepted religion by the progressives controlling the White House, Senate and House of Representatives right now. The great sweeping plans of Obama and the collectivist crew of progressives is NOT worried about the environment one way or another, they’re only in it for the power they can grab and the money that goes with it. Lies that back up their positions are not contested by the liberal media and the constitution is used as toilet paper by statists tied into the linkage existing between Big Gov and Big-Science. Science that serves political interests is never real science. You’d have thought that lesson should have been learned from the earlier socialists in Germany (a.k.a. the national socialists a.k.a. the Nazis) and renowned socialists in England such as George Bernard Shaw all of whom were calling for “mass scale eugenics.” But, of course, the progressives have changed history so that most Americans believe that the Nazis were right-wingers, not lefties . . . .

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,


** Richard Sandor of Obama’s and Gore’s CCX, Chicago Climate eXchange) which hopes to dramatically exploit the so-called global-warming issue, has repeatedly said it’ll be a $10 TRillion a year industry. Since the present economy is $15 TRillion, that means that without adding a single product or service the economy will become $25 TRillion in size, thus $10 TR. / $25 TR. = 67% increase in prices.

Read more…