Re: Federal Prisons Are Beginning to Force Trans Inmates Off Hormone Therapy

In article <[email protected]>, 
[email protected] says...
> 
> On May 27, 2026 at 8:47:33 AM MST, "zendejo" wrote
> <[email protected]>:
> 
> > On 5/26/26 5:16 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
> >> On May 26, 2026 at 3:33:55 PM MST, "zendejo" wrote
> >> <[email protected]>:
> >> 
> >>> On 5/26/26 4:06 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
> >>>>> Twisted science and scientists have been know to lie.
> >>>> You reject science. Thanks for admitting my point.
> >>> 
> >>> He rejects junk or pay to play science, you otoh revel in it.
> >> 
> >> I looked to science... peer reviewed.
> 
> You ignored this.

No, you snipped.
> 
> >> 
> > You misspelled "grant-herded" pay for play.
> > 
> > https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/follow-the-climate-change-money
> > 
> > he first iron rule of American politics is: Follow the money. This
> > explains, oh, about 80 percent of what goes on in Washington.
> > 
> > Shortly after the latest Chicken Little climate change report was
> > published last month, I noted on CNN that one reason so many hundreds of
> > scientists are persuaded that the sky is falling is that they are paid
> > handsomely to do so.
> > 
> > I noted that ?In America and around the globe governments have created a
> > multi-billion dollar Climate Change Industrial Complex.? And then I
> > added: ?A lot of people are getting really, really rich off of the
> > climate change industry.? According to a recent report by the U.S.
> > Government Accountability Office, ?Federal funding for climate change
> > research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has
> > increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an
> > additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities
> > provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009.?
> > 
> > This doesn?t mean that the planet isn?t warming. But the tidal wave of
> > funding does reveal a powerful financial motive for scientists to
> > conclude that the apocalypse is upon us. No one hires a fireman if there
> > are no fires. No one hires a climate scientist (there are thousands of
> > them now) if there is no catastrophic change in the weather. Why doesn?t
> > anyone in the media ever mention this?
> > 
> > But when I lifted this hood, it incited more hate mail than from
> > anything I?ve said on TV or written. Could it be that this rhetorical
> > missile hit way too close to home?
> > 
> > How dare I impugn the integrity of scientists and left-wing think-tanks
> > by suggesting that their research findings are perverted by hundreds of
> > billions of dollars of taxpayer handouts. The irony of this indignation
> > is that any academic whose research dares question the ?settled science?
> > of the climate change complex is instantly accused of being a shill for
> > the oil and gas industry or the Koch brothers.
> > 
> > Apparently, if you take money from the private sector to fund research,
> > your work is inherently biased, but if you get multimillion-dollar
> > grants from Uncle Sam, you are as pure as the freshly fallen snow.
> > 
> > How big is the Climate Change Industrial Complex today? Surprisingly, no
> > one seems to be keeping track of all the channels of funding. A few
> > years ago Forbes magazine went through the federal budget and estimated
> > about $150 billion in spending on climate change and green energy
> > subsidies during President Obama?s first term.
> > 
> > That didn?t include the tax subsidies that provide a 30 percent tax
> > credit for wind and solar power ? so add to those numbers about $8
> > billion to $10 billion a year. Then add billions more in costs
> > attributable to the 29 states with renewable energy mandates that
> > require utilities to buy expensive ?green? energy.
> > 
> > 
> > Worldwide the numbers are gargantuan. Five years ago, a leftist group
> > called the Climate Policy Initiative issued a study which found that
> > ?Global investment in climate change? reached $359 billion that year.
> > Then to give you a sense of how money-hungry these planet-saviors are,
> > the CPI moaned that this spending ?falls far short of what?s needed? a
> > number estimated at $5 trillion.
> > 
> > For $5 trillion we could feed everyone on the planet, end malaria, and
> > provide clean water and reliable electricity to every remote village in
> > Africa. And we would probably have enough money left over to find a cure
> > for cancer and Alzheimers.
> > 
> > The entire Apollo project to put a man on the moon cost less than $200
> > billion. We are spending twice that much every year on climate change.
> > 
> > This tsunami of government money distorts science in hidden ways that
> > even the scientists who are corrupted often don?t appreciate. If you are
> > a young eager-beaver researcher who decides to devote your life to the
> > study of global warming, you?re probably not going to do your career any
> > good or get famous by publishing research that the crisis isn?t happening.
> > 
> > But if you?ve built bogus models that predict the crisis is getting
> > worse by the day, then step right up and get a multimillion dollar grant.
> > 
> > Now here?s the real scandal of the near trillion dollars that
> > governments have stolen from taxpayers to fund climate change hysteria
> > and research. By the industry?s own admission there has been almost no
> > progress worldwide in actually combatting climate change. The latest
> > reports by the U.S. government and the United Nations say the problem is
> > getting worse not better and we have not delayed the apocalypse by a
> > single day.
> > 
> > Has there ever been such a massive government expenditure that has had
> > such miniscule returns on investment? After three decades of ?research?
> > the only ?solution? is for the world to stop using fossil fuels, which
> > is like saying that we should stop growing food.
> > 
> > Really? The greatest minds of the world entrusted with hundreds of
> > billions of dollars can only come up with a solution that would entail
> > the largest government power grab in world history, shutting down
> > industrial production (just look at the catastrophe in Germany when they
> > went all in for green energy), and throwing perhaps billions of human
> > beings into poverty? If that?s the remedy, I will take my chances on a
> > warming planet.