Tron: Ares — The End of the Screen Actors Guild and Hollywood?

By Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

Tron: Ares | The Evolution

In an October 9, 2025 Indei Wire article titled “How the Original ‘Tron’ Changed Movies Forever, and Why It Didn’t Win an Oscar in 1983” Jim Hemphill wrote:

With “Tron: Ares” opening in theaters this weekend, we take a look back at the 1982 original that revolutionized CGI and influenced nearly every science-fiction film to come — even though it wasn’t even nominated for a visual effects Oscar.

In the late 1970s, filmmaker Steven Lisberger began experimenting with backlit animation, a process in which colored light shines through clear sections of animation cels to create unique and beautiful effects. Lisberger achieved success applying the technique to commercials and educational films, while also keeping a close eye on developments in the relatively young field of computer animation.

During this time, he wondered: Was there a way to apply the technology to a feature film? When video games started to catch on in a big way, Lisberger saw a world that lent itself to the techniques he had perfected.

He wrote a treatment about a brilliant game creator named Flynn who was ripped off by his boss and had to hack his way into the company’s computer system to find the evidence. When trying to break into the computer, Flynn is shot by a laser that digitizes him and places him inside the computer, where he must fight alongside “programs” — avatars for the programmers who created them — to get to the truth and find his way back out to the real world.

In the original film Tron Legacy a brilliant video game maker (Jeff Bridges) hacks the mainframe of his ex-employer, he is beamed inside an astonishing digital world and becomes part of the very game he is designing.

WATCH: Tron Legacy: Highlights and Popular Quotes

Today we have the first Artificial Intelligence actress.

The Martin Mawyer reported:

Meet Tilly Norwood. She’s young, beautiful, and — much to Hollywood’s horror — not real.

WATCH: Hollywood’s Newest Actress Is AI-Generated

She’s the world’s first AI “actress,” created by Dutch comedian and producer Eline Van der Velden.

Tilly isn’t a flesh-and-blood woman who signs contracts, storms off sets, or sues her director. She’s an algorithm in a dress. And Hollywood is in a full-blown panic.

The Screen Actors Guild is clutching its pearls. Agents are sweating. Movie stars are wailing that “art is dead.”

You can picture it now: Beverly Hills prima donnas with mascara running down their cheeks, stylists fainting in hair salons, and producers screaming into their oat-milk lattes.

Because deep down, everyone in the industry knows what this means: actors and actresses are no longer indispensable.

Think about the savings.

AI doesn’t need stunt doubles, makeup trailers, or a hotel suite with twenty-seven white candles and a personal hairdresser flown in from Milan.

No food budget. No personal assistants. No entourages demanding first-class flights and organic yak butter. No late-night calls to bail your lead actor out of jail. No lawsuits. No #MeToo exposés.

Just performance — cheap, efficient, and drama-free.

And for conservatives, here’s the beauty: no more sanctimonious Oscar speeches.

No more overpaid actors lecturing America about politics, faith, or morality while cashing million-dollar checks.

Tilly Norwood will never “bravely” tell you to shut up about your religion or move to Canada if the wrong candidate wins. She’ll just show up on screen and deliver her lines — without a single lecture.

Yes, the elites will fight. They’ll threaten to strike, sue, and cry about “the death of the craft.”

But money always wins in Hollywood. And money says: Why pay George Clooney when a hard drive does the job without demanding royalties or a private chef?

So here it is: the end of an era.

TRON ARIES IS ABOUT GOOD AI VS EVIL AI

The film TRON: Aries is fundamentally about good vs. evil. On the one hand you have a good AI programmer Eve Kim, played by Greta Lee, who wants to create a lasting AI reality to help mankind. On the other hand you have another AI programmer Jullian Dillinger, played by Evan Peters, who uses his programs to try to steal the code from the good AI programmer Eve Kim. We won’t tell you who wins, if you want to know watch the film.

More importantly today, in Tron: Ares | The Evolution, we are witnesses to the growth of Artificial Intellegence’s impact on film making.

Like it’s predecessor Tron: Ares has now made the first step in fundamentally transforming film making.

A full 20% of this Disney Studios remake is AI. Additionally 20% of the actors and actresses are AI. This truly is the beginning of the end of an era in film making.

We predict that within the next two years you will see films produced exclusively using AI actors and actresses like Tilly Norwood to make featured films and television series.

These films will cost less, provide the same visual experiences, and more, to movie goers.

The Film Actors Guild, unions, camera crews, and living actors and actresses will be replaced. There will still be producers and directors. But the main people driving the movie industry will be AI programmers.

We have now gone from computer animation to AI. It’s like going from the internet to AI.

Wait and see if our prediction comes to pass.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Multiple Failures of Obamacare are the Unspoken Skunk for Dems in the Shutdown Showdown

By Family Research Council

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) chose extending “temporary” Obamacare COVID pandemic tax credits as their hill to die on in the October 2025 government shutdown showdown with President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans.

But the ugly reality behind Democrats’ hyperbolic rhetoric predicting soaring monthly premiums and millions of Americans losing coverage is the fact Obamacare has been a disaster for the American health care system, according to multiple voices across the political spectrum. Thus, whether they realize it or not, Schumer and Jeffries are now stuck holding the skunk.

Least expected to be among those critical voices was an October 5 missive from the editorial board of The Washington Post — long the hometown voice of the Government Party in American politics, but more recently experiencing a Jeff Bezos-directed slow-motion re-introduction to reality.

“The real problem is that the Affordable Care Act [Obamacare] was never actually affordable. President Barack Obama’s signature achievement allowed people to buy insurance on marketplaces with subsidies based on their income. The architects of the program assumed that risk pools would be bigger than they turned out to be. As a result, policies cost more than expected,” the Post editorial board wrote.

But that fundamental failure underlying Obamacare was not all on the Post editors’ minds that day, as they continued:

“To salvage the program, Democrats expanded subsidies to entice more people to buy plans. Many poor families wound up getting insurance for free, and the rolls grew: 24 million people now have coverage through the ACA exchanges. People earning more than 400 percent of the poverty line — about $129,000 for a family of four — would see their subsidies go away.

“Democrats picked this fight because they see health care as a winning issue. A Post poll, conducted on the first day of the shutdown, found that 71 percent of Americans say federal insurance subsidies should be extended while 29 percent say they should end as scheduled. Just as significantly, the question divides Republicans: 38 percent support extending the subsidies, and 62 percent want them to end.”

And then, in a statement that was even less expected than the admission of Obamacare’s “real problem,” came this paragraph:

“This is how entitlement programs work. Once you habituate people to some generous government handout, they grow dependent on it. And it becomes politically perilous, if not impossible, to fully claw it back. Conservatives fought so hard to stop Obamacare 15 years ago because they anticipated fights like this one.”

Whether the Post editors realized it or not, with that paragraph, they endorsed the Right’s fundamental critique of the Welfare State since its advent in Bismarck’s Germany in the late 1800s. Somewhere, a stunned former President Ronald Reagan, who often declared federal programs to be “the closest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this Earth,” is declaring his amazement that “they finally get it.”

Even if Democrats succeed through the shutdown in salvaging some sort of interim preservation of the “temporary” Obamacare tax credit subsidies, think tankers on the Right point to a host of additional profoundly serious flaws in the government health care system.

“Rarely in public policy have we witnessed such a radical disparity between high-profile promises and real-world performance. Obama said that his signature bill would bend the health care cost curve downward. Instead, aggregate health care spending has soared,” Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Robert Moffit told The Washington Stand.

Moffit spent eight years as a senior Reagan administration political appointee handling congressional relations at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), where he learned valuable insider lessons about the federal workforce and the government health care system. At Heritage, Moffit became one of the most widely respected and quoted conservative health care experts.

“Recall that Obama said that the average family would see a $2,500 reduction in their yearly health costs, but instead exchange premiums exploded and family deductible increases were crazy. While Obama claimed his bill would create robust choice and competition in the individual markets, in fact, choice and competition sharply declined, leaving many families at the mercy of a monopoly or a duopoly,” Moffit continued.

“Worse, most Obamacare plans had narrow networks, limiting patient access to preferred doctors, hospitals, and specialists. Meanwhile, taxpayers have been forced to pay for Obama’s massive failure in health care cost control through ever higher health insurance subsidies, now reaching families with six figure incomes, while simultaneously funding a massive expansion of Medicaid, a poorly performing welfare program,” he said.

Economic Policy Innovation Center Budget Policy Director Matthew Dickerson offered additional insights into the problems ravaging Obamacare, telling TWS that “the Biden COVID tax credits are an attempt to paper-over the failures of Obamacare to deliver affordable health care that people want to purchase.”

Dickerson also pointed out that “giving hundreds of billions in subsidies to big insurance companies may shift costs to the taxpayers, but it won’t solve the problems caused by Obamacare. Premiums would still increase for most families, according to the filings from the insurance companies.”

He continued, “The Biden COVID Credits were always meant to be temporary, based on the partisan law signed by President Biden. When the extra subsidies paid to insurance companies expire, the taxpayers will still pay for more than 80% of the premium costs for a typical enrollee and an even greater share for low-income families.”

Another devastating analysis of Obamacare’s multiple failures comes from The Paragon Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank headed by former White House Special Assistant for Economic Policy under Trump Brian Blase. In an analysis entitled “The Falsehoods of Obamacare,” the Paragon study pointed to multiple unfulfilled promises from the program.

One of those promises was that the program would help save many lives that would otherwise be lost due to inadequate access to health care, but, according to Paragon, “life expectancy fell three consecutive years for the first time in nearly 100 years” following Obamacare’s implementation.

Another such failed promise spotlighted by Paragon was that Obamacare would make shopping for health care insurance easy. In fact, “the [Obamacare] portal was one of the most notoriously unreliable websites ever launched.”

Yet another failed promise, according to Paragon, was the claim Obamacare would boost the individual coverage field into a competitive, robust, growing marketplace. The actual result has been “enrollment was less than half of expectations, with higher premiums and deductibles and more restrictive provider networks than expected through 2020.” Things are little improved in this respect in 2025.

Finally, in perhaps the best-known failed Obamacare promise that “if you like your plan, you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep him or her as well.” The reality has proven to be that “millions of people had their plans canceled and lost access to their doctors.”

AUTHOR

Mark Tapscott

Mark Tapscott is senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Controversy over Political Violence Gives Va. GOP Boost ahead of Statewide Election

New Jersey Board of Education Candidate Drops Out amid Resurfaced Text Scandal Inciting Violence

Washington Agrees to Permanently Drop Enforcing Law Targeting Catholic Priests

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Back-to-School Sanity: Start Parenting, Stop Helicoptering

By John Droz, Jr.

More Critical Thinking about Parenting. 

I occasionally repost another author’s column that I believe is consistent with my Critical Thinking objective.

This is a good example from respected parenting guru John Rosemond…

As should be widely known by now, I take requests.

“Can you give us some back-to-school tips?” asks Geraldine, mother of three.

Yes, Geraldine, I can, and will, the first such tip being…

It is my civic responsibility to inform you that your child is not without fault. And yes, your child is capable of “it,” whatever it is. Your child, like all human progeny, is capable of lying, stealing, bullying, disrespecting, vandalism, etc..

In and of itself, bad behavior doesn’t mean you’re a bad parent. Sometimes, because free will is a wild card, decent people raise indecent people.

If a teacher says your child did so-and-so, there’s a 98 percent chance the teacher is 100 percent spot on and even if she’s only 85 percent spot on, which is about as low as it gets, it is important that children see solidarity among the adults who care for them, so support your child’s teacher when she says he isn’t a candidate for sainthood.

Teachers consistently report that their favorite students are not necessarily those who make the best grades, but those who pay attention, obey the rules, and do their best (whatever their “best” may be).

Good behavior begins in the home, not at school, and not even the best teacher can discipline a child who comes to school not already respectful of adult authority.

Make the rules of proper behavior clear to your child, and when the rules are broken, enforce with a firm, even hand. Research finds that a child’s level of self-control is positively associated with school achievement.

Again, teachers tell me that the best students are usually those who have daily chores at home. It makes sense, doesn’t it, that a child who comes to school already accustomed to accepting assignments at home will have fewer problems accepting assignments from teachers?

The more responsible a child is within his or her family, the more responsibility the child will demonstrate in the classroom.

The research is increasingly unequivocal: screen time of any sort decreases attention span. Learning from a real-life, flesh-and-blood teacher requires being ready to ask questions, being ready to answer questions, memorizing, conducting independent inquiry, transferring what you’ve learned to paper, listening to the teacher’s feedback concerning your work, and correcting your mistakes.

As for television alone, a researcher once found that truly gifted children tended to watch no more than five hours of television a week. The national average is 25 hours per week per child, which is simply to say if you want your child to be average, let him watch a lot of television

There is a difference between interest and involvement. The interested parent says to the child, in effect, “I am concerned about your education, but it is ultimately your responsibility.’‘ The involved parent says, “Your education is my responsibility.’‘

Unfortunately, too many well-intentioned parents have unwittingly accepted/appropriated responsibility for their children’s school work. The result of this parental benevolence is a child who has difficulty taking the proverbial bull by the horns. New research supports this low-involvement parenting model.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Take a load off and have a lovely parenthood!

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

2025 Vehicle Operating Costs

By John Droz, Jr.

Once again the mainstream media is trying to deceive us. 

The marketing strategy for electric or hybrid vehicles, almost always pushes the idea that consumers should ignore the higher initial cost, as the annual operating costs will soon make up the difference (e.g., see here).

Recently, AAA published the latest US annual operating costs for common vehicle types, and compared electric, hybrid, and gas. This unbiased source clearly indicates that such a story is not typically true. As seen below, the gas option was lowest for two scenarios and about the same for the other two. In all four cases a gas vehicle was less expensive than an electric vehicle.

INFOGRAPHIC: Cost per Year @ 15,000 miles driven — Your Drivings Costs 2025 from AAA

Compared to the one-sided sales pitches in most mainstream media articles, this one lists multiple shortcomings of buying an electric or hybrid vehicle.

BTW, this just out: Nearly one-third of EV charging attempts fail, report finds.

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

Tylenol and Autism: More to the Story

By Joan Swirsky

In 2020, the Atlanta-based U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said that one in 36 children (approximately four percent of boys and one percent of girls) was estimated to have autism-spectrum disorder, estimates that were significantly higher than those in all previous years.

But just five years later, according to the press conference held just weeks ago on September 22, President Trump — in the presence of U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz — announced that the Department of Health and Human Services stated that autism had surged in America nearly 400% and now affects 1 in 31 American children…

…and that this alarming statistic was a result of pregnant women taking Tylenol during their pregnancies!

Within milliseconds, everyone weighed in, from a skeptical Scientific American to the hearty support of the Icahn School in the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine.

Here, Dr. Josh Redd explains in plain English why Tylenol is so bad for pregnant women.

Besides the pros and cons, disturbing facts emerged, not the least of which is that the FDA knew about the Tylenol-autism link over a decade and a half ago…but did nothing!  Talk about “follow the money”!

In fact, as early as 2019, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) study recommended — again, with no follow-through — that the labels be revised to advise pregnant women to “be careful about casual use of acetaminophen when it is not strongly needed for pain or other purposes.”

It took a few years, but since September 2022, according to the BirthInjuryCenter.org , over 100 lawsuits have been filed nationwide against acetaminophen manufacturers, claiming damage over the failure to warn pregnant users that Tylenol and generic versions may increase the risk of having a baby with autism and/or ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder).

By that I mean that this potentially life-altering announcement omitted — actually failed — to include a quite obvious cause of autism’s precipitous rise over the past several decades.

To explain: In the early ’70s, I worked nights — the 11 P.M. to 7 A.M. shift — as a delivery room nurse at a university-affiliated hospital near my home on Long Island.  It was a revolutionary time in obstetrics, when the Lamaze method of “prepared childbirth” and the use of sonograms to visualize fetuses were gaining popularity.

Actually, ultrasound technology was first developed in Scotland in the mid-1950s by obstetrician Ian Donald and engineer Tom Brown to detect industrial flaws in ships.  By the end of the ’50s, ultrasound was routinely used in Glasgow hospitals, but it was not until the 1970s that it was used in American hospitals to check that the developing baby, placenta, and amniotic fluid were normal and to detect abnormal conditions such as birth defects and ectopic pregnancies.

At the end of the ’70s, I became a certified Lamaze teacher and spent the next 22 years giving weekly classes to couples in my home.  In a very real way, I had my own laboratory, as I learned directly from my clients about the increasing escalation of sonogram exams they had as the decades elapsed.

In the early 1980s, it was common for only one or two out of the ten women in my classes to have a sonogram.  In just a few years, every woman in my classes had had a sonogram.  And in the late ’80s and ’90s, almost every woman had not one sonogram, but often two or three or four or five — starting as early as three or four weeks’ gestation and extending, in some instances, right up to delivery!

It was in the ’90s, in fact, that it occurred to me that the scary rise in the incidence of autism might be linked to the significant rise in ultrasound exams.  Over the years, I’ve posited my theory to a number of people, written letters to the editors of newspapers — including to the N.Y. Times, for which I wrote for over 20 years, but they still refused to publish my letter — and emailed my idea to one of the top news people at the Fox News Network, but the “we report/you decide” powers that be on that TV station strangely decided not to report on this subject.

I contacted autism researchers Dr. Marcel Just and Dr. Diane L. Williams, who told me via email that Dr. Pasko Rakic at Yale was, indeed, exploring the autism-ultrasound link.

Then, in 2006, I found an article in Midwifery Today, “Questions about Prenatal Ultrasound and the Alarming Increase in Autism,” by writer-researcher Caroline Rodgers.

“The steep increase in autism,” Rodgers wrote, “goes beyond the U.S.: It is a “global phenomenon” that “has emerged … across vastly different environments and cultures.”

However, Rodgers added, “what all industrial countries do have in common is … the use of routine prenatal ultrasound on pregnant women.  In countries with nationalized health care, where virtually all pregnant women are exposed to ultrasound, the autism rates are even higher than in the U.S., where due to disparities in income and health insurance, some 30 percent of pregnant women do not yet undergo ultrasound scanning.”

Aha!  Could this be why blacks and Hispanics in America continue to lag behind whites in the development of autism?

Dolphins, Whales…Relevance?

In the summer of 2012, as many as 3,000 dead dolphins were found in Peru.  Researchers at the Organization for the Conservation of Aquatic Animals (ORCA), a Peruvian marine animal conservation organization, attributed the mass deaths to the use of deep-water sonar by ships in nearby waters.

Even earlier, in June of 2008, four days after a Navy helicopter was using controversial sonar equipment during training exercises off the Cornish coast in Great Britain, 26 dolphins died in a mass stranding.

These events — and literally thousands that are similar — are relevant because many mass deaths and strandings of whales and dolphins have been attributed to the sonar waves emitted from Navy ships.

In 2009, an article in Scientific American by John Slocum explained that sonar (sound navigation and ranging) systems, which were first developed by the U.S. Navy to detect enemy submarines, “generate slow-rolling sound waves topping out at around 235 decibels; the world’s loudest rock bands top out at only 130.  These sound waves can travel for hundreds of miles under water and can retain an intensity of 140 decibels as far as 300 miles from their source.”

Slocum wrote that a successful 2003 lawsuit against the Navy brought by the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to restrict the use of low-frequency sonar in waters rich in marine wildlife was upheld by two lower courts, but the Supreme Court “ruled that the Navy should be allowed to continue the use of some mid-frequency sonar testing for the sake of national security.”

Two quick questions: If sonar can kill fully developed dolphins, what effect, then, does it have on the developing brains of in utero embryos and fetuses?  And why was the massive use of sonograms during pregnancy not even considered an area of research in our government’s investigation?

And Then There’s the Heat!

Just as concerning, as far back 1982, the World Health Organization (WHO)’s study, “Effects of Ultrasound on Biological Systems,” concluded that “neurological, behavioral, developmental, immunological, hematological changes and reduced fetal weight can result from exposure to ultrasound.”  Two years later, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) reported that when birth defects occurred, the acoustic output of sonograms was usually high enough to cause considerable heat.

And yet, in 1993, the FDA approved an eightfold increase in the potential acoustical output of ultrasound equipment!  Ostensibly, this increase was to enhance visualization of the heart and small vessels during microsurgery.  Clearly, the health and well-being of developing fetuses was not a consideration!

Getting back to those embryos and fetuses, Rodgers explained that “when the transducer from the ultrasound is positioned over the part of the fetus the operator is trying to visualize, the fetus may be feeling vibrations, heat, or both.”

Rodgers then cited a warning the Food and Drug Administration issued way back in 2004: “Even at low levels, [ultrasound] laboratory studies have shown it can have … jarring vibrations” — one study compared the noise to a subway coming into a station — “and a rise in temperature.”

The cause of autism, Rodgers wrote, “has been pinned on everything from ‘emotionally remote’ mothers … to vaccines, genetics, immunological disorders, environmental toxins and maternal infections.  A far simpler possibility … is the pervasive use of prenatal ultrasound, which can cause potentially dangerous thermal effects.”

Imagine how these assaults affect the developing brain of a fetus!

Enter Hard Science

In August 2006, Pasko Rakic, M.D., chair of Yale School of Medicine’s Department of Neurobiology, announced the results of a study in which pregnant mice underwent various durations of ultrasound.  The brains of the offspring showed damage that was also found in the brains of people with autism.

The research, funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, also implicated ultrasound in neurodevelopmental problems in children, such as dyslexia, epilepsy, mental retardation, and schizophrenia, and showed that damage to brain cells increased with longer exposures.

Dr. Rakic’s study, Rodgers said, “is just one of many animal experiments and human studies conducted over the years indicating that prenatal ultrasound can be harmful to babies.”

Follow the Money

In The Daily Beast, Jennifer Margulis, author of Business of Baby: What Doctors Don’t Tell You, What Corporations Try to Sell You, and How to Put Your Baby before Their Bottom Line, wrote that Dr. Rakic “concluded that all nonmedical use of ultrasound on pregnant women should be avoided.”

In her research, Margulis said that she discovered that “there is mounting evidence that overexposure to sound waves — or perhaps exposure to sound waves at a critical time during fetal development — is to blame for the astronomic rise in neurological disorders among America’s children.”

Clearly, there is a vast human tragedy — a true man-made disaster — taking place before our eyes.

For whatever reasons — follow the money? — the mountain of evidence that points to a causal relationship between prenatal ultrasound exams and an escalating pandemic of autism is being systematically ignored.

Could it have anything to do with the huge investments doctors and scientists have made in ultrasound technology, which, according to Jennifer Margulis, “adds more than $1 billion to the cost of caring for pregnant women in America each year”?

Could it have anything to do with the revenue now pouring like an avalanche into the coffers of diagnostic and treatment centers and classrooms?

Could it have anything to do with modern journalism’s almost complete abandonment of hard-nosed reporting and life-saving exposés?

As Caroline Rodgers said, there is an elephant in the room when it comes to the subject of autism, and that elephant is the worldwide blitzkrieg of ultrasound exams on pregnant women, exams that have bombarded the babies they’re carrying with the brain-warping sound waves and heat that will continue to affect them every second of their autistic lives.

Yoo-hoo, President Trump, RFK Jr., and Dr. Oz!  It’s way past time to give pregnancy sonograms the same attention and warnings you gave so confidently to Tylenol!

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Energy Department Cuts $7.56 Billion in Green Projects

By Family Research Council

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has terminated nearly $8 billion in green energy projects, it announced Thursday, determining “that they did not meet the economic, national security or energy security standards necessary to justify continued investment.” The cancellations delivered on President Trump’s agenda to “protect taxpayer dollars and expand America’s supply of affordable, reliable, and secure energy,” the DOE argued.

The DOE terminated 321 awards for 223 projects, coming to a grand total of $7.56 billion. More than a quarter (26%) of these awards — amounting to $3.1 billion — were granted by the Biden administration between President Trump’s November 2024 victory and his January 2025 inauguration, the department said.

In May 2025, Energy Secretary Chris Wright directed program offices to request more information from awardees for a case-by-case review of awards that would “identify waste, safeguard taxpayer dollars, protect America’s national security, and advance President Trump’s commitment to deliver affordable, reliable, and secure energy for the American people.”

“Following a thorough, individualized financial review,” the DOE continued, it “determined that these projects did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs, were not economically viable, and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars.”

Although the DOE did not provide a complete list, the canceled awards include those for projects “intended to suck carbon dioxide from the sky” and California’s “state’s hydrogen hub, the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems, or ARCHES.” (“Clean hydrogen” involves splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen using renewable energy.)

In fact, most of the canceled awards were attached to green energy projects in Democrat-controlled states. White House Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Director Russ Vought called attention to this fact in a tweet. “The projects are in the following states: CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IL, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA.” However, some canceled projects were also identified in Tennessee, Florida, and Iowa.

The October 2 cuts were actually the second round of award cancellations announced by the DOE. On May 30, the department announced the cancellation of 24 awards totaling $3.7 billion, 16 of which were granted after Election Day.

The May award cancellations came amid the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) vigorous efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal government, and they received pushback from congressional Democrats at the time.

This time, the DOE announced the award cancellations amid a government shutdown, as Democrats in Congress have plenty more pressing matters attracting their attention.

Although some news reports have tied the DOE cuts to the Trump administration’s hardball shutdown tactics, the only connection is the timing; the DOE did not rely on any shutdown rationale in cutting the grants, and the end of the shutdown will not reinstate them. However, award recipients do have 30 days to appeal the termination.

California Governor and prospective presidential candidate Gavin Newsom (D) reacted furiously to the cancellation of green energy awards in his state, “In Trump’s America, energy policy is set by the highest bidder, economics and common sense be damned,” he complained. “We’ll continue to pursue an all-of-the above clean energy strategy that powers our future and cleans the air, no matter what D.C. tries to dictate.”

Newsom’s mention of “economics” in defense of green energy subsidies is curious, since any form of energy (or any product whatsoever) that is forced to rely on government subsidies is, by definition, not economically viable. If green energy is economic, it can survive without government subsidies.

Wright’s decision to cancel green energy spending comes days after the Energy Department and Interior Department jointly announced on Monday a plan to ramp up production of fossil fuels.

The Trump administration plans to reopen 13 million acres to coal mining, after new mining was forbidden by the Biden administration. The administration will also lower royalty rates, repeal regulations on the coal industry, and provide $625 million in government subsidies recommissioning and modernizing coal plants, expanding coal power into rural communities, and improving waste management systems to extend coal life.

The Trump administration has chosen its preferred fuel, and it has decided to turn away from costly green energy subsidies to less costly coal subsidies.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Transform or Terminate? Our options for failing Federal Agencies.

By John Droz, Jr.

We MUST choose wisely!

Almost everyone complains about government — Local, State, & Federal. It’s right up there with finding fault with your spouse, being annoyed with your kids, bitching about the weather, etc., etc.

Today, let’s just focus on Federal Agencies (e.g., DOE, EPA, DHHS, DOEd).

Unfortunately, most people have lots of complaints about them — but they are short on quality solutions. As readers here are hopefully critical thinkers, we should be able to be more than whiners, and actually provide meaningful and practical solutions. Let’s go through the four important federal agencies I mentioned, and see what we get…

Energy is an under-appreciated and enormously important part of our everyday life. Just have the power in your house go off for a day (or a week!) and you will quickly see how almost EVERYTHING we do involves some form of energy (e.g., electricity).

The fundamental problem with the DOE is that it has replaced real Science with political science. For decades, it has endorsed make-believe energy options like wind turbines. For example, here it still says that DOE’s objective is to “support wind energy as an abundant, readily accessible resource that fosters economic prosperity, societal well-being, and energy security.”

That is a political statement devoid of Science. It is unadulterated ignorance, as there is nothing about industrial wind energy that genuinely “fosters economic prosperity, societal well-being, and energy security.” Nothing!

With such profound departures from their mission statement and statutory obligations, does this mean we should Terminate the DOE?

I hear no serious person or organization saying that. Rather, they are saying let’s get a competent DOE Secretary (like Chris Wright) and have him do what it takes to get DOE onto the right track, as we need federal energy oversight.

So far, that is exactly what has happened: DOE is in the process of being substantially reformed, which includes making our energy policies much better. This is the direction that is in the best interest of America!

The EPA has only been around since 1970. (See some history here.) It has been primarily driven (controlled) by NGOs that are environmental advocates (e.g., the Sierra Club). Like the energy situation, if we are suddenly subjected to an environmental problem (e.g., our water supply becomes polluted), this can very quickly become a major concern.

The reality of life on Earth is that everything is “dirty” to some extent. Further, no one wants problematically polluted air, water, ground, etc. The core EPA questions are: 1) What parts of our world should the EPA be involved with? 2) At what level of pollution of these world components should the EPA get involved?, and 3) exactly what authority should the EPA have to fix things?

The problem here is that unelected NGOs have effectively turned the EPA into an alarmist, activist agency. Worse, their assurance that they only utilize “the best available science” is a joke.

A classic example is Climate Change. The EPA has aggressively targeted CO2, which is NOT a pollutant. (Note: anything in excess can cause a problem.) CO2 is a naturally occurring gas that is an essential part of the life process — from humans to plants.

As with DOE, the fundamental problem with the EPA has been that it has replaced real Science with political science. For decades, it has supported make-believe crusades like demonizing CO2. For example, the so-called Endangerment Finding is what they have used to justify trillions of dollars of rules and regulations on US citizens and businesses.

That is a political campaign devoid of real Science. It is unadulterated ignorance that is mostly about bringing America down.

With such profound departures and overreach from their mission statement and statutory obligations, should we Terminate the EPA?

I hear no serious person or organization saying that. Rather, they are saying let’s get a competent EPA Administrator (like Lee Zeldin) and have him do what it takes to get the EPA onto the right track, as we need competent federal oversight of the environment.

So far, that is exactly what has happened: the EPA is in the process of being substantially reformed, which includes making our environmental policies much better. This is the direction that is in the best interest of America!

Clearly, our health is also an enormously important matter. Again, just like with energy, if we suddenly lose it (e.g., come down with a serious illness), all of a sudden, this will become our top priority.

I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but again, the fundamental problem with the DHHS has been that it has replaced real Science with political science. For decades, it has allowed self-serving parties (like Big Pharma) to dictate US healthcare policies.

For example, the COVID fiasco made it clear to anyone paying attention that CDC/FDA policies and enormous amounts of wasted money were more designed to profit pharmaceutical companies rather than improve the health of US citizens.

One simple but powerful example is to examine the THOUSANDS of scientific studies that were done about proposed COVID-19 treatments. The clear results are that treatments endorsed by the FDA/CDC did poorly (e.g., Paxlovid, Remdesivir, etc.) while treatments opposed by the FDA/CDC did well (IVM, HCQ, etc .) That was a political campaign devoid of Science that likely resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

With such profound departures from their mission statements and statutory function, does this mean we should Terminate the DHHS?

I hear no serious person or organization saying that. Rather, they are saying let’s get a competent DHHS Secretary (like RFKjr) and have him do what it takes to get the DHHS onto the right track, as we need proper federal oversight of our failing healthcare system.

So far, that is exactly what has happened: DHHS is in the process of being substantially reformed, which includes making our healthcare policies much better. This is the direction that is in the best interest of America!

Here is a brief history of DOEd, which (at 4000± employees) is the smallest of all federal agencies. For example, DHHS has about 100,000 employees.

Guess what? The fundamental problem with the DOEd has been that it has replaced real education Science with political science. For example, for decades, it has allowed self-serving parties like teachers’ unions (e.g., AFT) and the American Library Association (ALA) to dictate US K-12 education policies. This has been an unmitigated disaster.

Unfortunately, the DOEd has not focused on what it should be doing: providing constructive K-12 leadership to the States. The end result is that the fifty states are, by and large, wandering aimlessly like sheep in a large field, without any shepherd — while progressive wolves take them over.

For example, the COVID fiasco made it clear to anyone paying attention that the States and the unions were not focused on what was best for our children. This was the States’ doing, as the DOEd had nothing to do with this.

Another simple but powerful example is that forty-nine (49) States agreed to adopt most or all of the NGSS — which is a horrific set of K-12 Science standards (e.g., see here). The DOEd had nothing to do with this either!

With these and other widespread failures in our K-12 education system (e.g., inferior test results), should we terminate the DOEd?

Unlike with the other failing — but important — federal agencies, I do hear otherwise competent people and organizations advocating that. For some reason, they do not apply the same logic that applies to the other poorly performing federal agencies to the DOEd.

They should be saying let’s get a competent DOEd Secretary and have her do what it takes to get the DOEd onto the right track — as we need competent federal oversight of our devastated K-12 education system.

YES, that is the correct answer, and it’s all spelled out here.

So far, the focus has been to dismantle DOEd rather than to substantially reform it (i.e., to make our decrepit K-12 education system much better). This is NOT the direction that is in the best interest of America!

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

Elon Musk Wants You To Cancel Your Netflix Subscription — Here Are 5 Good Reasons Why thumbnail

Elon Musk Wants You To Cancel Your Netflix Subscription — Here Are 5 Good Reasons Why

By The Daily Caller

Elon Musk wants you to cancel your Netflix subscription.

The tech billionaire urged his 227 million followers to “[c]ancel Netflix for the health of your kids” in an Oct. 1 post on X. Musk has shared numerous posts criticizing transgender themes in children’s television shows available on Netflix.

If you’re on the fence, here are five good reasons to never give another penny to Netflix.

1. An Obama-Produced Gay Wedding

Ada Twist, Scientist follows an “eight-year-old Black scientist” as she “explores people through scientific discovery, collaboration, and friendship” according to Rotten Tomatoes. The cartoon is rated TV-Y, according to Netflix, indicating the content is appropriate for children of all ages.

Ada Twist is produced by former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama’s production company, Higher Ground.

YIKES. Ada Twist, Scientist, a show for 7-YEAR-OLDS on @Netflix, showcases young students coming together to set up and celebrate their teacher’s gay wedding.

Oh, and Barack and Michelle Obama are the show’s executive producers. pic.twitter.com/1LL2lkY8FH

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 30, 2025

One episode of the show features young students working together to throw a gay wedding.

“Everyone’s favorite karate instructor, Sensei Dave, will be marrying mixed martial arts champion, Jiu Jitsu Joe,” an animated reporter gushes.

After the men tell each other, “I do” and “I definitely do,” the reporter pronounces them “husband and husband.” The men kiss, confetti explodes, the children applaud.

2. Crossdressing Toddler Musical 

“Something that we know about you, you love to get up and dance,” sing two animated men to a young boy in CoComelon Lane. The boy is supposed to be their son.

“How about you break out those moves for you two biggest fans?”

The young boy does just that, putting on a tutu and a tiara, performing for the gay men.

OMG. CoComelon Lane, a Netflix show for CHILDREN, showcases a little boy in a dress, dancing for his two gay dads.

Why does @netflix have so many shows pushing LGBTQ propaganda on children??? pic.twitter.com/5X4vaRQmtT

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 30, 2025

The boy then considers which outfit to wear. One of the men tells the boy, “Just be you.”

“Just be me?” The boy questions.

“Yep.”

The show is rated TV-Y, according to the Netflix catalog.

3. Rocko’s Very Modern Life 

I’ll concede that Rocko’s life is very modern. I won’t concede it’s appropriate for children aged seven or older, as Rocko’s Modern Life: Static Cling is rated on Netflix.

The Nickelodeon reboot features a “prominent trans character,” according to Gay Times.

Ralph Bighead, a character in the original series, is now Rachel Bighead.

Series creator Joe Murray told Entertainment Weekly that an episode in the original series, in which Bighead tries to hide his identity as a clown in a town of jesterphobes, was intended as a gay allegory.

“We were still playing by the rules, so to speak, and still trying to interject those situations [into the cartoon],” Murray told Entertainment Weekly.

Oh, neat. Children’s television has been corrupted for decades. Producers and writers just feel no need to disguise their intentions anymore.

4. Dead End

Where to start with this one.

Netflix cancelled Dead End: Paranormal Park in 2023, according to show creator Hamish Steele. It remains available on their site and is rated TV-Y7.

Protagonist Barney Guttman is a “a gay Jewish teenage trans boy finding love and acceptance while struggling with unaccepting family members,” according to a review in Paste Magazine.

🚨 If you haven’t cancelled @netflix yet, use this as your justification:

“Dead End: Paranormal Park” is targeted for ages 7+, which pushes trans ideology. See for yourself! pic.twitter.com/D4rREAuhf2

— Gays Against Groomers (@againstgrmrs) September 30, 2025

Paste praises the show for its “groundbreaking trans representation.”

“Despite bigots complaining about the show being ‘inappropriate’ for kids, Dead End: Paranormal Park is definitely targeted at a younger audience than its source comics,” Paste writes.

“Targeted” feels like the right word choice here.

“Before making the show, I’d developed quite a few shows, and I love kids’ shows 100 percent, so we try to make it so that there’s nothing in the show that is inappropriate for an 8-year-old. But I think there’s an age group that cartoons just sort of abandoned for a long time, and assumed that when you get to about 12 or 13, you’re just watching adult shows,” show creator Steele told the Hollywood Reporter.

See, silly bigots. The show isn’t “inappropriate.” It’s only sowing confusion in kids on the edge of puberty and leading them down a path of irreversible damage.

5. Fund For Creative Perversion

If you remain unperturbed by Netflix’s catalogue of kid’s shows, consider the following business decision.

Netflix’s Fund for Creative Equity funds the Transgender Film Center, a “nonprofit advancing the work of transgender film creators,” according to Netflix.

“Our mission is to bring more trans-made stories to the world, and we designed the lab to address the root of the opportunity, by helping more transgender creators find career success in TV and film,” said Sav Rodgers, the Transgender Film Center’s executive director, according to Netflix.

🚨Netflix is an activist outfit, hellbent on ideological indoctrination.

As part of its ‘Fund for Creative Equity’, it has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to the ‘Transgender Film Centre’ in order to “bring more trans-made stories to the world”.https://t.co/dvCEKrYzql

— James Esses (@JamesEsses) October 2, 2025

The Transgender Film Center’s 2024 “career development lab participants” consists of eight diversely pronoun-ed individuals, including “Sir Lex Kennedy,” whom you may refer to as “he,” “they,” or “sir.”

Kennedy is a “vegan, queer, black trans masculine media content creator,” according to Netflix.

Then there’s Xoài Pham, a “a Vietnamese trans woman descended from warriors, healers, and shamans.”

Another in the cohort is a “transfemme Iranian-American filmmaker” with a “dissociative adolescence” who tells stories of “aloof trans girls force-feminizing bigoted men.”

…It’s just fetishes all the way down, isn’t it.

AUTHOR

Natalie Sandoval

Patriots Writer. Follow Natalie Sandoval on X: @NatSandovalDC.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ohio LGBT Activists Want To Make Sure Gender-Confused Kids Only Have One Option

Popular Kids’ Show CoComelon Lane Features Boy In Tutu And Tiara Dancing For 2 Gay Dads

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Winning the AI Arms Race

By Editorial Board – DrRichSwier.com

The race to the top is heating up, but who will emerge victorious with artificial intelligence? In this episode, you will discover what led to the recent turbulence at OpenAI and whether they can balance commercial success with their nonprofit roots. Joining us is Bobby Reardon, President of Constellation Data Solutions. Lee, Rich, and Bobby explore the power dynamics and strategies of the big seven tech giants (Facebook, Amazon, Nvidia, Google, Tesla, OpenAI, and Microsoft).

Together, they analyze the competitive landscape and predict which companies are leading the charge in AI innovation. Dive into important discussions on trust issues in AI, how nonprofits are navigating for-profit opportunities in AI, and advancements in AI compute power with Nvidia GPUs.

WATCH: Winning the AI Arms Race

For more about The AI Guys check us out here: substack.aiguyspod.com/

Brought to you by RAIA – https://raiabot.com — a Launch Page for A.I. Business Agents.

This podcast is produced by Two Brothers Creative 2024. ‪@twobrotherscreative‬

Interested in A.I.?

Check out our podcast A.I. Guys. Subscribe to us on Apple, Spotify, Youtube (or others).

All links: lnkd.in/eXDpww6V

Spotify: lnkd.in/ee9h9GYB

Youtube: lnkd.in/etDvqQ7d

Apple: lnkd.in/epYT2GSi

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Lights, Camera … Delete: Meet Tilly Norwood the world’s first AI “actress”

By Majority Report

Meet Tilly Norwood. She’s young, beautiful, and — much to Hollywood’s horror — not real.

WATCH: Hollywood’s Newest Actress Is AI-Generated

She’s the world’s first AI “actress,” created by Dutch comedian and producer Eline Van der Velden.

Tilly isn’t a flesh-and-blood woman who signs contracts, storms off sets, or sues her director. She’s an algorithm in a dress. And Hollywood is in a full-blown panic.

The Screen Actors Guild is clutching its pearls. Agents are sweating. Movie stars are wailing that “art is dead.”

You can picture it now: Beverly Hills prima donnas with mascara running down their cheeks, stylists fainting in hair salons, and producers screaming into their oat-milk lattes.

Because deep down, everyone in the industry knows what this means: actors and actresses are no longer indispensable.

Think about the savings.

AI doesn’t need stunt doubles, makeup trailers, or a hotel suite with twenty-seven white candles and a personal hairdresser flown in from Milan.

No food budget. No personal assistants. No entourages demanding first-class flights and organic yak butter. No late-night calls to bail your lead actor out of jail. No lawsuits. No #MeToo exposés.

Just performance — cheap, efficient, and drama-free.

And for conservatives, here’s the beauty: no more sanctimonious Oscar speeches.

No more overpaid actors lecturing America about politics, faith, or morality while cashing million-dollar checks.

Tilly Norwood will never “bravely” tell you to shut up about your religion or move to Canada if the wrong candidate wins. She’ll just show up on screen and deliver her lines — without a single lecture.

Yes, the elites will fight. They’ll threaten to strike, sue, and cry about “the death of the craft.”

But money always wins in Hollywood. And money says: Why pay George Clooney when a hard drive does the job without demanding royalties or a private chef?

So here it is: the end of an era.

The red carpet is being rolled up, the velvet ropes packed away. Soon the only thing left in Tinseltown will be the sound of faint sobbing as the last “Gaffer” explains to his grandchildren what he used to do for a living.

Lights. Camera. Delete.

AUTHOR

Martin Mawyer

Martin Mawyer is the President of Christian Action Network, host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. Subscribe for more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Please visit the Majority Report substack.

Messages From Above: Critically Thinking about Birds

By John Droz, Jr.

It’s comfortable for us to think that our current world is well understood. The reality is that there is a LOT we do not know.

For example, in my field of physics, the more closely we look at microscopic things (e.g., various energies in atoms), the more we realize what we do not fully understand.

The opposite is also true: the more closely we look at macroscopic things (e.g., galaxies), the more we realize we do not fully comprehend.

Feel free to explain these complex unknowns any way you want, but (as a scientist), my conclusion is that these are proof of God. To believe that all these intricacies just happened coincidentally is beyond silly.

Anyways, sometimes everyday things jar us a bit from our routine, maybe enough to give our existence some introspection. In that light, I am passing on what a good friend experienced and sent me to publish…

John:

This happened to me on Wednesday, September 10th, 2025. I think that there is meaning to it, but you and your readers can each decide for yourselves…

When I first heard that Charlie Kirk had been shot (and regrettably saw the horrendous footage), I was very distraught. I have two teenagers and while they can’t name many people in politics, they certainly knew of Charlie Kirk.

Starting at 4 PM EST that day, my children had dentist appointments. As I was rushing around getting ready to first take my daughter to her appointment, I noticed a hummingbird trapped in our garage, fluttering around the ceiling.

It was desperately trying to escape, but was unable to find his (her?) way thru the large double doors that were open, and with abundant light pouring in.

I left both garage doors open and drove my daughter to her appointment, hoping the hummingbird would be gone by the time I returned to pick up my son. When I came back (15± min later), I was surprised and disappointed to see that the hummingbird was still frantically trying to find his way out.

Even though I was in a huge hurry to now get my son to his appointment, I couldn’t bear the thought of leaving, knowing this poor bird was still trapped. So, I grabbed the tallest grass rake I could find and attached a lightweight sweater to the end.

I then started sweeping it across the ceiling as high as I could reach, hoping to catch the little bird in my sweater as carefully as possible. Initially, he flew away as soon as I approached him with my rake contraption. I persisted, and suddenly he seemed to have a change of heart, as he hopped on my sweater the next time it passed him by.

I carefully lowered the rake with my draping sweater. I was sure that he would fly back up to the ceiling as soon as I got close — but surprisingly, he didn’t. I rotated the rake around so I could view him, face-to-face.

He was calm and quiet, but covered in dusty cobwebs. I walked out into the open driveway under a clear blue sky. Again, I thought that once outside he would quickly leave — but no. It was like he knew there was more to come. So I carefully started to clean the dirt and cobwebs from his wings and back.

Amazingly, he let me pull every last one of them off and never made a single attempt to move or fly away. Once I had cleaned him up, I put my finger down to his little feet and he stepped up on it. I lifted him up and rotated my hand slightly so I could again look into his eyes and admire his beauty. He seemed content settling on my extended finger.

I had never ever seen a hummingbird up so close and personal before. After a long and glorious 10 seconds or so, I lifted my hand ever so slightly and quietly said, “Okay,” as in, goodbye, he could go now.

The little hummingbird then flew away high up into the sky. I then felt a moment of peace (as well as awe) from this simple experience. I still had to get my son to his dentist, so I called for him to get into the car, and we left.

I shortly received the news that Charlie Kirk’s spirit had just left him. He passed on close to the time that I had been relating to the hummingbird, which had then gracefully flown into the sky. Draw your own inferences…

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

MUST WATCH: The AI Guys Origin Story

By Editorial Board – DrRichSwier.com

Welcome to “The AI Guys” podcast!

Join hosts Lee Dickson and Rich Swier as they take you on a journey through the world of AI.

In this episode, they share their personal journeys and experiences in the tech world. From discussing the parallels between the rise of the internet and AI, to exploring practical and technical aspects, Lee and Rich aim to make AI accessible and easy to understand for entrepreneurs, business owners, and the everyday consumer.

With candid conversations and expert insights, they will demystify AI’s impact on our daily lives and future possibilities. Discover why AI is not just another tech trend, but a fundamental shift in how we interact with technology.

WATCH: The AI Guys Origin Story

Visit The AI Guys on YouTube.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Trump Vows to Reopen Mental Institutions, Their Closure “Catastrophic Mistake”.

By Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

Common sense leadership.

The left’s failed policies turned our cities into open-air asylums. Time to bring sanity back.

Trump says he’d consider reopening ‘insane asylums’ to help clean up some of the nation’s biggest cities

The Independent, September 2025:

President Donald Trump has said he would be open to bringing back “insane asylums” to imprison people with “serious mental illness”.

In an interview with the Daily Caller published on Monday, the president said that forcing more people into long-term psychiatric institutions would help make America’s streets safer, although he admitted it would be “massively expensive”.

“Well, they used to have them, and you never saw people like we had,” Trump said. “They released them all into society because they couldn’t afford it. You know, it’s massively expensive…

“But we had, they were all over New York. I remember when I was growing up… they released them into society, and that’s what you have. It’s a rough, it’s a rough situation.”

He added: “You can’t have these people walking around… so dangerous, so dangerous. And they can live to be 85 years old.”

Neither Trump nor the Daily Caller made clear exactly what they meant by “insane asylums”. But the term is usually applied to an older kind of psychiatric institution in which those deemed mentally ill could be involuntarily confined for months or years, often in brutal conditions and with little medical effect.

Repeated abuse scandals, court judgements, and new mental health medications — as well as the system’s vast expense — led to a wave of reforms that made it much more legally difficult to detain a sick person for long periods of time, ultimately cutting the population of such facilities by over 90 percent.

But some doctors and politicians have also criticized the new status quo, arguing that it has left large numbers of vulnerable people with mental illnesses living rough on the streets or cycling in and out of jails, general hospitals, and short-term psychiatric facilities.

Trump has long expressed support for bringing back asylums. On the campaign trail, he reportedly promised: “When I am back in the White House, we will use every tool, lever, and authority to get the homeless off our streets…

“And for those who are severely mentally ill and deeply disturbed, we will bring them back to mental institutions, where they belong… with the goal of reintegrating them back into society once they are well enough to manage.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Essence of Inner Energy: A Path to Universal Spiritual Awakening

By Amil Imani

In this vast tapestry of human existence, there exists an intangible force that animates our lives — a subtle energy born from our deepest emotions and experiences. This energy, often likened to a vital essence harvested from the spectrum of human feelings, is not merely a fleeting phenomenon reserved for the mystically inclined or those touched by rare epiphanies. Rather, it represents a fundamental aspect of our being, accessible to all through disciplined and intentional practices. Far from being isolated incidents, encounters with this inner vitality can become a consistent reality, fostering profound personal growth and a sense of unity with the cosmos. By understanding its nature and cultivating methods to engage with it, individuals from all walks of life can elevate their consciousness, transforming ordinary existence into a journey of enlightenment.

At its core, this energy emerges from the interplay of our emotional states. Intense feelings, whether born of joy, sorrow, fear, or love, generate a potent force that resonates beyond the physical realm. Historical accounts and philosophical traditions suggest that such energy serves as a bridge between the individual and a greater universal intelligence. It is not extracted against our will but rather flows as a natural byproduct of life’s trials and triumphs, contributing to a collective reservoir of awareness. Negative emotions, like anger or despair, can produce a dense, turbulent form of this energy, often leading to cycles of inner turmoil. In contrast, positive states such as compassion and gratitude yield a lighter, more harmonious vibration, promoting healing and expansion. The key insight is that this process is not random; it is governed by principles that anyone can learn to influence.

Consider the notion that our planet serves as a grand academy for the development of the soul. Here, experiences are not mere happenstances but deliberate opportunities for refinement. Through repeated incarnations — or what some describe as the ongoing evolution of consciousness — this energy accumulates, allowing the essence within us to gather wisdom. It begins in simpler forms of life and progresses to human complexity, where self-awareness enables deliberate participation. This evolutionary path suggests that spiritual insights are not exclusive gifts, but rather attainable milestones. Countless individuals throughout history, from ancient sages to modern seekers, have reported transcendent moments where they perceive this energy directly: a sudden clarity, an outpouring of inner light, or a deep connection to all existence. These are not anomalies but the fruits of persistent effort, demonstrating that with the right approaches, such states can be replicated and sustained.

To harness this energy and reduce the burdens of past unresolved experiences — what might be termed emotional residues — one must adopt practices that purify and elevate the inner self. Begin with rhythmic vocalizations or affirmations, repeated in a focused manner. These can be simple phrases invoking health, peace, or liberation from old patterns, intoned with sincerity before rest or during quiet times. Such repetitions, especially when combined with controlled breathing, help to realign internal frequencies, dissolving blockages and enhancing restorative sleep cycles. Deep, intentional breaths – inhaling slowly through the nose and exhaling through the mouth — serve as a foundational tool, calming the nervous system and allowing suppressed energies to surface and release.

Physical postures and movements form another pillar. Gentle stretches, held with awareness, combined with steady breathing, strengthen the body’s channels for energy flow. These exercises, performed daily, reduce restlessness and foster a balanced aura, making one less susceptible to disruptive influences. For those seeking deeper introspection, periods of sensory withdrawal are invaluable. This involves retreating from external stimuli — dimming lights, silencing noises, and turning inward — to observe thoughts without judgment. Over time, this practice sharpens mental clarity, enabling the identification and dissolution of limiting beliefs that perpetuate negative cycles.

Ethical living plays a crucial role in this journey. Acts of kindness, performed without expectation of reward, create positive ripples that lighten one’s inner load. Cultivating virtues such as humility, forgiveness, and non-violence shifts the focus from self-centered desires to communal harmony. By living in alignment with universal principles — honoring truth, respecting others, and stewarding the environment — one accumulates uplifting energy, countering the weight of past missteps. Gratitude rituals, like daily reflections on life’s blessings, reframe the mind, transforming potential sources of drain into wellsprings of vitality.

Devotional paths offer yet another avenue, where heartfelt connection to a higher power — through prayer, song, or contemplation — ignites inner fire. This devotion, when genuine, dissolves ego barriers, allowing energy to flow freely. Similarly, paths of action emphasize selfless service: volunteering, creating art, or innovating solutions that benefit society. These endeavors prove one’s positive impact, reinforcing a sense of purpose and accelerating spiritual progress. Intellectual pursuits, such as studying profound texts or engaging in philosophical discourse, provide wisdom that detaches one from material illusions, paving the way for liberation.

Even dedicated periods of self-discipline amplify these efforts. Committing to a structured regimen — abstaining from excesses, maintaining purity in thought and deed — for an extended time, such as several weeks, burns away accumulated residues. Immersing in natural elements, like flowing rivers or sacred sites, symbolizes renewal, washing away old patterns. Solitude, too, is a powerful ally; time alone in reflection fosters aversion to superficial distractions, deepening one’s quest for truth.

Scientific perspectives, while often skeptical, align in subtle ways. Studies on mindfulness and biofeedback show how these practices alter brain waves, enhancing emotional resilience and perceptual acuity. Quantum theories hint at interconnected fields of energy, suggesting our inner states influence broader realities. Thus, what appears metaphysical is grounded in observable phenomena, accessible through empirical self-experimentation.

In essence, attaining heightened states of inner energy is not reserved for the elite or the fortunate. It demands consistency, patience, and an open heart, but the rewards — profound peace, expanded awareness, and freedom from repetitive struggles — are within reach. By integrating these practices into daily life, anyone can transcend ordinary boundaries, contributing to and drawing from the universal essence. This journey affirms our shared potential: a testament that spiritual awakening is a birthright, achievable through deliberate cultivation. As more individuals embark on this path, the collective human experience elevates, fostering a world of greater harmony and insight.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Who is King of America?

By Karen Schoen

October 17, 2025 there will be another protest for NO Kings. I thought and said out loud, “Boy these people have no clue as to what they are asking for.” How pathetic. They are giving away their own power. In America, We the People are King. We the People are the sovereign. Of course you have to know what a sovereign is before you want to get rid of one. A sovereign is the Supreme Ruler, the Top Dog, the one to whm everyone answers. In America that great gift is reserved for We The People. This is also known as “Self Governance.”

Our American Founders gave We The People that power. They revolted and fought against giving one person Sovereign Rule. They fought against Taxation without Representation. Boston Tea anyone?

Think of a pyramid. We The People are on top. We The People designed the states which are below us. We directed the states to form a federal government. Our founders called it the General Government below the states.

We the People are on top.

The states and federal government are below us.

They are our servants.

We the People are the Supreme aka the Sovereign.

They take orders from us. It is the highest ranking sovereign that decides what is law and what is not law.

Surreptitiously, ever so slowly the Lord of Easy Money began his ascent to the top and We the People began to sell our power and give away our power. Eventually as the people’s power eroded, We the People forgot who is boss. We didn’t vet our candidates. We allowed ourselves to be manipulated, frightened and controlled. We allowed them to lie to us and complied because it was easier that demanding the truth. We the People caved. We became COWARDS. We didn’t fight for our power and voice in government.

We didn’t conduct oversight looking for constitutionality, we didn’t learn the law. So then our servants began believing their own lies. They told us they were richer and smarter so we should just let them handle our lives. They knew better. Because we did not pay attention, they started playing Take Away. How much could they take from us before we noticed? In order for them to complete their mission, they had to lie to make sure they had total control and power over us. So, they took over the law.

Our founders had set up a COMMON LAW GRAND JURY giving the States and We The People both the authority, the power and responsibility to decide if an Act of a Congress, an Executive Order, an agency rule or regulation or judicial decision was constitutional. Unfortunately, We the People did not pay attention. We didn’t learn to read and we allowed them to manipulate us making the law so convoluted and twisted we now have to pay a lawyer $500 an hour just to settle our cases.

Over time the Common Law Grand Jury became the lawyers, the prosecutors Civil Grand Jury. We The People lost our voice. We lost our control. As a matter of fact in many states the Common Law Grand Jury became outlawed. The law of the people became twisted as lies overtook the truth. Right now the people are working hard to gain back some of which they lost.

The next BIG LIE designed to control We The People and scare us into submission while stealing our wealth is the climate hoax. We can always count on Climate changes occurring at the same time each year. Climate is pretty regular. Summer, Fall, Winter Spring. The weather is pretty volatile. We can usually count on it being hot in the summer and cold in the winter, due to all the variables like wind, dust, evaporation, clouds volcanoes, hurricanes, tornadoes, snow, asteroids, comets, earthquakes, tsunamis etc. we can never guarantee anything.

We have been taught that “the science is settled”. The science is never settled! The day science is settled is the day we stop growing! We stop challenging, expanding our minds, our imaginations. We stop seeking answers to questions, like: Is there life in the Universe besides our own?

We The People have been taught to believe the lies of the rulers. The lies are designed to keep us in line. This is all about:

MONEY* POWER*CONTROL

According to THEIR LIES:

  • CO2 will cause our death rather than enhance our lives
  • eating chemicals are better than eating meat
  • wind and sun power are economical, efficient and effective
  • eliminating plastic straws will save the planet
  • ice caps are melting and will flood our coastlines and properties

We The People must understand that many of the “scientists” telling We The People these false claims have been paid by the government. “Scientists have a mandate to continue to experiment. Results that fit the Rulers Talking Points and Agenda. No deviation is permitted from the government’s message.

  • Don’t be fooled into believing the lies.
  • Find out for yourself by learning the truth!

Share your findings with others. Remember science is not settled or political. There are many ways to reach the same conclusion.

  • Join us for segment 2 with Scientist Charles Shults as we explore facts about Mars, Life in Space and the Climate.

Everything is connected. Nothing is random. Everything has a plan. All plans are lies. All Globalists want is MONEY, POWER, CONTROL. Don’t give them yours. Challenge them with the truth.

  • Is America worth saving?
  • Doing Nothing is affirmation.
  • IF NOT YOU, THEN WHO?
  • IF NOT NOW, THEN WHEN?

©2025 . All rights reserved.

GUEST: Kat Stansell, author, journalist, researcher

WEBSITE: newswithviews.com/author/Kat, miamiindependent.com

GUEST: Charles Shults, an author, a scientist with a career in Aerospace, Nuclear Physics and AI Research. Book: A Fossil Hunters Guide to Mars.

WEBSITE: shultslaboratories.com

TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO VOTE IN THE PRIMARY!!

Applying Knowledge is Power

Karen Schoen.

Karenbschoen.com

Radio Host: The Prism of America’s Education

americaoutloud.news

Trump Promises American Global Leadership: 7 Themes from His UN Speech

By Family Research Council

In an hour-long speech before the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, President Donald Trump rebuked world leaders for embracing nonsensical, self-destructive policies, and he urged them to follow America’s lead in restoring prosperity. Since the wide-ranging speech issued challenges to which other nations must respond, it’s worth reviewing the main highlights.

Here are seven themes Trump emphasized in his mammoth speech.

1. Trump championed human rights, including religious freedom for Christians.

“Let us defend free speech and free expression,” Trump urged world leaders. “Let us protect religious liberty, including for the most persecuted religion on the planet today — it’s called Christianity.” Trump is correct that Christians face ongoing persecution around the world, from jihadist massacres in Africa to official repression in China, and from Hindu mobs in India to policing of social media in the U.K.

As one example of a policy that promoted human rights abroad, Trump referred to the stiff tariffs he placed on Brazilian imports “in response to its unprecedented efforts to interfere in the rights and freedoms of our American citizens and others with censorship, repression, weaponization, judicial corruption, and targeting of political critics in the United States.”

2. Trump chided Western nations who recognized Palestine.

Trump also responded to eight Western governments that chose, for the first time, to officially recognize a state of Palestine this week. “As everyone knows, I have also been deeply engaged in seeking a ceasefire in Gaza,” the president stated. “Unfortunately, Hamas has repeatedly rejected reasonable offers to make peace, and we can’t forget October 7th, can we? Now, as if to encourage continued conflict, some of this body is seeking to unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state. The rewards would be too great for Hamas terrorists. … Those who want peace should be united with one message: release the hostages now.”

“The only way you can see it any other way is deliberately not looking at it,” responded Dr. A.J. Nolte, director of the Institute for Israeli Studies at Regent University, on “Washington Watch.” “In September 2025, you’re recognizing something that doesn’t exist, that doesn’t have any governance capacity, where no Palestinian leadership has any legitimacy from the population they’ve actually governed, and no Palestinian entity has any ability to provide peace, order, and security over areas they have controlled thus far.”

“Also, you’d be empowering Hamas because the dispute in Palestinian politics is, do we pursue a negotiated peace? Or do we use violence to try to achieve our ends?” Nolte continued. “The Europeans, and the Canadians, and the Australians are essentially rewarding the pursuit of violence.”

3. Trump criticized European open borders and reliance on Russian oil.

Trump was not done criticizing the nations of Europe. Whereas Trump has “been working relentlessly stopping the killing in Ukraine,” he said, “inexcusably, even NATO countries have not cut off much Russian energy. … Think of it, they’re funding the war against themselves.”

Here again, Trump followed his criticism with a ready policy corrective. “In the event that Russia is not ready to make a deal to end the war, then the United States is fully prepared to impose a very strong round of powerful tariffs,” he said. “But for those tariffs to be effective, European nations, all of you are gathered here right now, would have to join us in adopting the exact same measures.” The European countries say they recognize the threat Russia poses, but are they prepared to effectively counter it?

Trump also rebuked European leaders for “destroying your countries” with open borders policies. “Europe is in serious trouble. They’ve been invaded by a force of illegal aliens like nobody’s ever seen before. Illegal aliens are pouring into Europe, and nobody’s doing anything to change it, to get them out. It’s not sustainable. … When your prisons are filled with so-called asylum seekers who repaid kindness … with crime, it’s time to end the failed experiment of open borders.”

But Trump’s attacks on Europe were more than venting. Instead, Trump shrewdly provided European leaders with both the vision and language for how to do better — following America’s lead, of course. “We have reasserted that America belongs to the American people, and I encourage all countries to take their own stand in defense of their citizens as well,” he urged.

4. Trump bashed the U.N.’s ineffective record, especially on climate change.

On immigration, Trump found blame enough to go around to the United Nations, too. “The United Nations is funding an assault on Western countries and their borders,” he complained. “The U.N. is supporting people that are illegally coming into the United States, and then we have to get them out. The U.N. also provided food, shelter, transportation, and debit cards to illegal aliens — can you believe that? — on the way to infiltrate our southern border.”

But that was only the tip of the iceberg. Trump alleged that the U.N. was failing at everything from its core purpose — preventing war — to proper building maintenance. “I ended seven wars, dealt with the leaders of each and every one of these countries, and never even received a phone call from the United Nations offering to help in finalizing the deal,” said Trump.

Instead, Trump used his “run-ins with broken equipment at the United Nations” to “underscore deeper complaints about the efficiency of the United Nations,” summarized FRC President Tony Perkins. “All I got from the United Nations was an escalator that on the way up stopped right in the middle,” Trump added. “And then a teleprompter that didn’t work. These are the two things I got from the United Nations, a bad escalator and a bad teleprompter.”

“The president is basically right,” Nolte argued. “The one thing that it could potentially claim credit for … is that the Cold War never turned hot,” although he added, “I think there [are] other factors as well.”

The U.N.’s mission to promote human rights was a failure from the start, Nolte added, because some of the world’s worst human rights abusers — Soviet Russia and then Communist China — held permanent veto power in the U.N. Security Council, where all real decisions are made. Likewise, the U.N. failed at peacekeeping and international development because “there were a lot of high, lofty ideals and no mechanisms for actually achieving that.”

But President Trump reserved his harshest criticism for the U.N.’s absurd record of climate alarmism. “In 1982, the executive director of the United Nations Environmental Program predicted that by the year 2000, climate change would cause a global catastrophe… [as] irreversible as any nuclear holocaust. … Another U.N. official stated in 1989 that within a decade, entire nations could be wiped off the map by global warming,” listed the president. “It used to be global cooling. If you look back years ago in the 1920s and the 1930s, they said global cooling will kill the world. … So now they just call it climate change because that way they can’t miss.”

Dr. Cal Beisner, president and founder of the Cornwall Alliance, defended what some might call Trump’s “climate skepticism” on “Washington Watch.” “While human contribution to climate change is real, it is not catastrophic,” he argued. “The benefits that we get from the energy we take from fossil fuels far outweigh any of the harms that come from the warming. And the added benefits to all plant growth, especially to crop yields from the added carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, also far outweigh the risks from climate change.”

5. Trump endorsed a return to conventional energy sources.

Trump explained that the U.N.’s alarmist climate predictions were used to badger rich nations to pursue expensive forms of renewable energy, while others were held to a much lower standard. Renewable energy sources are “a joke. They don’t work. They’re too expensive. They’re not strong enough to fire up the plants that you need to make your country great,” Trump charged. On energy, he said that “the United States is now thriving like never before. We’re getting rid of the falsely-named renewables.”

This provided yet another point on which Trump criticized European leaders. “Europe, on the other hand, has a long way to go, with many countries being on the brink of destruction because of the ‘green energy’ agenda,” he warned. “I love the people of Europe, and I hate to see it being devastated by energy and immigration. This double-tailed monster destroys everything in its wake, and they cannot let that happen any longer. You’re doing it because you want to be nice, you want to be politically correct, and you’re destroying your heritage.”

“I think he was dead right on that,” Beisner analyzed. “Europe has seen skyrocketing energy prices as it’s tried to replace extremely energy-dense, power-dense hydrocarbon fuels — that’s fossil [fuels] (coal, oil, natural gas) — with wind and solar, which are very low-density energy sources. And of course, when you’re trying to go from low-density [sources] to the extremely high densities that we actually need to power our electrical devices to move our vehicles down the road and so on — the more you have to go from low-density to high-density, the more it’s going to cost.”

If repetition provides emphasis, then Trump emphasized in closing that open borders and green energy — topics on which he criticized both the U.N. and Europe — were the primary emphasis of his speech. “In closing, I just want to repeat that immigration and the high cost of so-called green renewable energy [are] destroying a large part of the free world and a large part of our planet,” Trump repeated. “Countries that cherish freedom are fading fast because of their policies on these two subjects. You need strong borders and traditional energy sources if you are going to be great again.”

6. Trump committed to enforce an existing treaty against bioweapons research.

However, one other policy issue did attract Trump’s attention: “ending the development of biological weapons once and for all.” Trump narrated how, “Just a few years ago, reckless experiments overseas gave us a devastating global pandemic, yet despite that worldwide catastrophe, many countries are continuing extremely risky research into bio-weapons and man-made pathogens.”

Who could forget the COVID-19 pandemic? Notably, Trump’s description presented the lab-leak theory as fact, discrediting the theory of animal transmission promulgated by China.

For China was the true target of this agenda item. Having bashed the U.N.’s incompetence and denigrated the poor decision-making of European leaders, Trump implied that the world should look elsewhere for effective leadership. The nations that stand out as obvious options are China and the U.S., and the creation of the COVID-19 virus provided an excellent reason for nations to not trust China.

7. Trump touted his own record and promised American global leadership.

This all contributed to the real purpose of Trump’s speech, positioning the United States, and himself specifically, as the undisputed world leader. “This is, indeed, the golden age of America,” Trump declared. He boasted of “rapidly reversing the economic calamity we inherited from the previous administration,” having “successfully repelled a colossal invasion” at the southern border, and having “ended seven unendable wars” in just seven months.

Perhaps Trump was overselling his case, but some significant accomplishments of his administration are undeniable. For instance, “the previous administration also lost nearly 300,000 children,” said Trump, “and we found a lot of these children, and we’re sending [them] back … to their parents.”

Most relevant to the audience at hand, “on the world stage, America is respected again,” Trump declared. After four years of President Biden stumbling from weakness to folly, President Trump has indeed projected strength on the world stage, and world leaders have noticed. In his first weekend as president, Trump forced Colombia’s socialist president into abject submission. By June, nearly every NATO country had agreed to more-than-double their defense-spending commitment, “making our alliance far stronger and more powerful than it was ever before,” said Trump.

“I’ve come here today to offer the hand of American leadership and friendship to any nation in this assembly that is willing to join us in forging a safer, more prosperous world,” Trump declared. “And it’s a world that we’ll be much happier with.”

All in all, Trump delivered a “pretty strong message,” said Perkins. “I wonder how that will resonate with the member countries.” Beisner believed that “the European countries are going to have to be learning lessons … from President Trump … and I think that he was right to say that.”

Now that Trump has delivered his challenge, however, it is ultimately up to other governments to decide how they will respond. “I think countries that have retained a sense of self-confidence and national identity and desire for independence will receive it well. I think that countries that are struggling with those issues will not receive it,” predicted Nolte. “And so it will end up being a Rorschach test. It will say less about Trump and more about actually where everyone else is.”

Whatever the result, President Trump has seized the initiative, and the rest of the world must decide how to respond.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump to Sign Executive Order Dismantling ‘Domestic Terrorism Networks’

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

Empower TWS to continue reporting the truth and save tomorrow’s children today! This week only, your gift to defend the unborn will be TRIPLED thanks to FRC’s challenge match.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

TRANSCRIPT: Trump’s Epic UN Climate and Energy Takedown

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

President Trump shocked the UN General Assembly on Tuesday with a speech that presented the raw, unvarnished facts about climate and energy policy.

CFACT’s Marc Morano said, “President Trump delivered to the UN a speech that will go down in history as the most powerful, honest, and accurate climate speech ever given by a world leader.”

Here’s just a small sample of what President Trump told the UN:

  • We are getting rid of the falsely named renewables. They’re a joke.
  • Europe has a long way to go, with many countries on the brink of destruction because of the Green energy agenda.
  • If you don’t get away from the Green scam, your country is going to fail.
  • The carbon footprint is a hoax made up by people with evil intentions, and they’re heading down a path of total destruction.
  • China now produces more CO2 than all the other developed nations in the world.
  • We have still radicalized environmentalists, and they want the factories to stop. Everything should stop.
  • They want to kill all the cows.
  • The primary effect of brutal Green energy policies has not been to help the environment, but to redistribute manufacturing from developed countries … to polluting countries that are making a fortune.
  • The entire globalist concept of asking successful industrialized nations to inflict pain on themselves and radically disrupt their entire societies must be rejected completely.

Marc Morano said, “Trump hit every central tenet of the climate movement, from failed doomsday predictions to the ‘Green scam,’ to the ‘hoax’ of ‘carbon footprints,’ to past warnings about global cooling, to how the radicalized environmentalists want to ‘kill all the cows,’ to how Net Zero ‘redistributes manufacturing’ to China.”

Watch the President’s UN speech

Partial transcript

September 22, 2025

Energy is another area where the United States is now thriving like never before. We are getting rid of the falsely named renewables. By the way, they’re a joke. They don’t work. They’re too expensive. They are not strong enough to fire up the plants that you need to make your country great. The wind doesn’t blow. Those big windmills are so pathetic and so bad. So expensive to operate and they have to be rebuilt all the time. They start to rust and rot. The most expensive energy ever conceived and it’s actually energy… you’re supposed to make money with energy, not lose money. You lose money the governments have to subsidize. You can’t put them out without massive subsidies. Most of them are built in China, and I give China a lot of credit, they build them, but they have very few wind farms. Why is it that they build them and they send them all over the world, but they barely use them? You know that they use coal, they use gas, they use almost anything. But they don’t like wind. But they sure as hell like selling the windmills.

Europe on the other hand has a long way to go with many countries being on the brink of destruction, because of the green energy agenda. And I give a lot of credit to Germany. Germany was being led down a very sick path both on immigration, by the way, and on energy. They were going green and they were going bankrupt. The new leadership came in and they went back to where they were with fossil fuels and with nuclear, which is good. It’s now safe, and you can do it properly, but they went back to where they were. They opened a lot of different plants, energy plants, and they are doing well. I give Germany a lot of credit for that. They said, this is a disaster, what’s happening. They were going all green. All green is all bankrupt. That’s what it represents, and it’s not politically correct, I’ll be very badly criticized for saying it, but I’m here to tell the truth. I don’t care. It doesn’t matter to me.

I’m in New York City. I’m feeling a lot safer. We’re getting crime down. And by the way, Washington D.C. was the crime capital of America, and now it’s totally, after twelve days, it’s a totally safe city. Everyone’s going out to dinner, they are going out to restaurants, the wife can walk down the middle of the street, with or without you, nothing’s going to happen. My people have done a fantastic job, and yes, I called in the National Guard, and the National Guard took care of business and they weren’t politically correct, but they took care of business. We got seventeen hundred career criminals out and brought them back to where they came from, the countries where they came from, or put them in jails. Washington D.C. is now a totally safe city again and I welcome you, in fact, we’ll have dinner together at a local restaurant and we’ll be able to walk. We don’t have to go by an armored plated vehicle. We’ll walk right over there from the White House.

They’ve given up their powerful edge, a lot of the countries we’re talking about, in oil and gas which is essentially… closing the great North Sea oil. Oh, the North Sea oil, I know it so well. Aberdeen was the oil capitol of Europe. There’s tremendous oil that hasn’t been found in the North Sea. Tremendous oil. I was with the Prime Minister, who I respect and like a lot and I said, you see, it’s the greatest asset. They essentially closed it by making it so highly taxed that no developer, no oil company can go there. They have tremendous oil left and more importantly, they have tremendous oil that hasn’t even been found yet. What a tremendous asset for the United Kingdom. I hope the Prime Minister is listening, because I told it to him three days in a row. That’s all he heard. North Sea oil. North Sea, because I want to see them do well. I was to see them stop ruining their beautiful Scottish and English countryside with windmills and massive solar panels that go seven miles by seven miles, taking away farm land. So we’re not letting this happen in America.

In 1982, the Executive Director of the United Nations environmental program predicted that by the year 2,000 climate change would cause a global catastrophe. He said that it would be irreversible, as any nuclear holocaust would be. This is what they said at the United Nations. What happened? Here we are. Another UN official stated in 1989 that within a decade, entire nations could be wiped off the map by global warming. Not happening. You know it used to be global cooling. If you look back, years ago, in the 1920s and the 1930s, they said that global cooling will kill the world. We have to do something. Then they said that global warming will kill the world, but then it started getting cooler, so now they just call it climate change because that way they can’t miss. Climate change, because if it goes higher, or lower, whatever the hell happens is climate change. It’s the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world in my opinion. Climate change. No matter what happens, you’re involved in that. Not more global warming, not more global cooling. All of these predictions made by the United Nations, and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people who cost their countries fortunes, and have given their countries no chance for success.

If you don’t get away from the green scam, your country is going to fail. And I’m really good at predicting things. You know they actually said during the campaign, they had a hat, “Trump was right about everything.” And I don’t say that in a bragadocious way. I’m telling you, if you don’t get away from the green energy scam your country is going to fail. If you don’t stop people that you have never seen before, that you have nothing in common with, your country is going to fail.

And if you don’t stop people that you’ve never seen before, that you have nothing in common with, your country is going to fail. I’m the President of the United States, but I worry about Europe. I love Europe. I love the people of Europe, and I hate to see it being devastated by energy and immigration. This double-tailed monster destroys everything in its wake, and they cannot let that happen any longer. You’re doing it because you want to be nice, you want to be politically correct, and you’re destroying your heritage.

They must take control strongly and immediately of the unmitigated immigration disaster and the fake energy catastrophe before it’s too late. The carbon footprint is a hoax made up by people with evil intentions and they’re heading down a path of total destruction. The carbon footprint, it was a big, big thing. A few years ago, I remember hearing about the carbon footprint, and then President Obama would get into Air Force One, a massive Boeing 747, and not a new one, an old one, with old engines that spew everything into the atmosphere. He talked about the carbon footprint, we must do… Then he’d get in and he’d fly from Washington to Hawaii to play a round of golf, and then he’d get back onto that big beautiful plane, and he’d fly back, and he’d talk about, again, global warming and the carbon footprint. It’s a con job at extreme cost and expense.

Europe reduced its own carbon footprint by 37%. Think of that. Congratulations Europe. Great job. You cost yourself a lot of jobs, a lot of factories closed, but you reduced the carbon footprint by 37%. However, for all of that sacrifice and much more, it’s been totally wiped out and then some by a global increase of 54%, much of it coming from China and other countries that are thriving around China, which now produces more CO2 than all the other developed nations in the world. So all of these countries are working so hard on the carbon footprint, which is nonsense by the way. It’s nonsense. It’s interesting. In the United States, we have still radicalized environmentalists and they want the factories to stop. Everything should stop. No more cows. We don’t want cows anymore. I guess they want to kill all the cows. They want to do things that are just unbelievable, and you have it too.

But we have a border, strong, and we have a shape, and that shape doesn’t just go straight up. That shape is amorphous when it comes to the atmosphere. And if we had the most clean air, and I think we do, we have very clean air, we have the cleanest air we’ve had in many, many years. But the problem is that other countries, like China, which has air that’s a little bit rough, it blows. And no matter what you’re doing down here, the air up here tends to get very dirty because it comes in from other countries where their air isn’t so clean and the environmentalists refuse to acknowledge that. Same thing with garbage. In Asia, they dump much of their garbage right into the ocean. And over about a one-week and two-week journey, it flows right past Los Angeles. You’ve seen it, massive amounts of garbage. Almost too much to do anything about, flowing past Los Angeles, past San Francisco, and then somebody would get in trouble because he dropped a cigarette on the beach. The whole thing is crazy. The primary effect of these brutal green energy policies has not been to help the environment, but to redistribute manufacturing and industrial activity from developed countries that follow the insane rules that are put down, to polluting countries that break the rules and are making a fortune. They’re making a fortune.

European electricity bills are now four to five times more expensive than those in China, and two to three times higher than the United States, and our bills are coming way down. You probably see that. Our gasoline prices are way down. We have an expression drill, baby drill, and that’s what we’re doing. We’re going to be much lower a year from now, but they’ve come way down over the past year. As a result every air conditioner is like, it’s become very uncommon to see one in some of these countries, because electric costs are so high. So while the U.S. has approximately 1,300 heat-related deaths, annually, that’s a lot, Europe loses more that 175,000 people to heat deaths each year, because the costs are so expensive you can’t turn on an air conditioner. What is that all about? That’s not Europe. That’s not the Europe that I love and know. All in the name of pretending to stop the global warming hoax.

The entire globalist concept of asking successful industrialized nations to inflict pain on themselves and radically disrupt their entire societies must be rejected completely, and totally, and it must be immediate. That’s why in America, I withdrew from the fake Paris Climate Accord, where, by the way, America was paying so much more than every country. Others weren’t paying. China didn’t have to pay until 2030. Russia was given an old standard that was easy to meet, a 1990 standard. But for the United States, we’re supposed to pay like a trillion dollars. And I said, “This is another scam.” The fact is United States has been taken advantage of by the world for many, many years, but not any longer, as you probably noticed.

I unleashed massive energy production and signed historic executive orders to hunt for oil. But we don’t have to do much hunting because we have the most oil of any nation, anywhere, oil and gas in the world. And if you add coal, we have the most of any nation in the world. Clean. I call it clean, beautiful coal. You can do things today with coal that you couldn’t have done 10 years ago, 15 years. So I have a little standing order in the White House. Never use the word coal, only use the words clean, beautiful coal. Sounds much better, doesn’t it? But we stand ready to provide any country with abundant, affordable energy supplies if you need them, when most of you do.

We’re proudly exporting energy all over the world. We’re now the largest exporter. In the United States, we want trade and robust commerce with all nations. Everybody. We want to help nations. We’re going to help nations, but it must also be fair and reciprocal. The challenge with trade is much the same with climate. The countries that followed the rules, all their factories have been plundered. It’s really sad to watch. They’ve been broken. They’ve been broken by countries that broke the rules.

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Injections for Babies: We are WAY off a scientific path here

By John Droz, Jr.

I have brought up some of this information before, but to date, few people seem to appreciate the extreme direness of this matter. Maybe it was my fault for including it with other material, as it might have gotten lost.

Today, this is my sole point: US vaccination recommendations for babies and young children have gotten way out of hand. In a word, they are not scientific.

As I wrote recently:

The “government” (especially the CDC) is currently advising parents of babies to give them almost 40 injections by the time they are TWO (2) years old. FORTY! (See CDC chart.)

The Science issue is not what the potential value of any one of these individual shots is, but rather that there have been ZERO scientific studies done that assess the long-term health risks to these babies from the combination of these 40± injections. However, anyone who questions the absurdity of this situation is quickly labelled an anti-vaxxer. Scientists should be skeptical!

Click here to view the Your child needs vaccines as they grow! chart

This CDC chart continues on through age six, so please check it out. It’s worse than my prior polite summary says. In actuality, the CDC’s full recommendations amount to SEVENTY-TWO injections for young children!!!

It’s easy to dismiss those asking whether this astounding collection of injections contributes to subsequent adverse health effects (e.g., autism). It’s easy to dismiss such views, but the scientific reality is WE DO NOT KNOW!

Here is a very thorough and well-documented discussion about the dire autism situation — by a person who disputes the vaccine connection. That said, they provide zero evidence as to why they believe that vaccines have nothing to do with the extraordinary spike in autism cases.

But what if we broaden our scope and look at the number of young people who have one or more chronic diseases? What is happening there? This recent study finds that “Pediatric chronic disease prevalence has risen to nearly 30% in the last 20 years.”

Also consider this new scientific study of 18,000± children. In layperson’s terms, it concluded that children who received zero or few vaccinations were significantly healthier than those who more closely adhered to the CDC recommendations!!!

One breath of fresh air is a new lawsuit against the CDC’s recommendation of 72 injections. Read it carefully.

Another optimistic development is that RFKjr has replaced all the people on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) board with fresh-faced experts. Contrary to what the lamestream media would like you to believe, these are good people.

As of this writing, they are in the middle of a two-day meeting this week! (Here is a good overview of what happened in yesterday’s 7 hour meeting.) You can watch day #2 live, here.

On a related matter, Who is Bobby Kennedy? is an interesting 30-minute documentary. He is hated (feared) by the entrenched unscientific elements of our current medical system, as he is lifting up many rocks that they don’t want touched.

RFKjr is taking a huge amount of abuse for YOU, so he needs your support. Consider subscribing to The MAHA Report plus watching their weekly 1-hour 4 PM Wednesday meeting (here is this week’s) are worthwhile steps you can take. As busy as I am, I do both.

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

Part 7: The Final Round — Gilbert Baker vs. The Church

By Majority Report

This is Part 7 of a 7-part series introducing Stolen Rainbow: The Great Unmasking — a powerful new film exposing how the LGBT movement hijacked God’s covenant symbol and turned it into a political weapon. See Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

The film premieres September 25 at the Republican Capitol Hill Club in Washington, D.C.

How the man behind the rainbow flag declared war on Christianity… and why it’s time to fight back

It’s not just a flag. It’s not just a movement. It’s a fight.

And it didn’t start in Washington. Or Hollywood. Or TikTok.

It started in the mind of a man who openly declared war on Christianity — and waved God’s rainbow like a middle finger at the sky.

His name was Gilbert Baker, the self-proclaimed designer of the LGBT rainbow flag.

And to understand how deep the deception goes — you have to understand him.

The First Punch: “Working Every Last Nerve of the Church”

Gilbert Baker wasn’t just an artist. He wasn’t just gay.

He was a provocateur with a vendetta — and he said so out loud:

“I’m all about working every last nerve of the Church.”

He didn’t want peace with Christianity. He wanted to irritate it to death.

So he joined the grotesque drag troupe The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, who dressed as demonic nuns and held events like the Hunky Jesus Contest — mocking Christ’s resurrection with blasphemous performances every Easter in San Francisco.

But Baker didn’t stop there.

In 1990, he dressed as a pink homosexual Jesus, parading through the streets as a crucified gay messiah.

And when artist Andres Serrano submerged a crucifix in urine and called it art — the infamous Piss Christ — Gilbert Baker praised it.

“A very beautiful photograph,” Baker said.
“We need more.”
“We need gay Jesus.”

This is the man who created the rainbow flag.

And today, that flag flies above churches across America.

The Church Takes the Hit

In 1966, Muhammad Ali fought Cleveland Williams — a man once hailed as a fierce contender.

But by fight night, Williams had already been shot in the gut, lost over 60 pounds, and barely trained.

Ali knocked him down four times in three rounds. It wasn’t a fight. It was a dismantling.

And that’s what the modern Church looks like.

Cleveland Williams on the ropes.

Bruised. Winded. Disoriented.
Taking punches from Gilbert Baker’s legacy — and hardly swinging back.

Rainbow flags on pulpits.
“Affirming” sermons that skip over Romans 1.
Pastors more afraid of media backlash than the judgment of God.

While the enemy throws uppercuts of mockery, sexual confusion, and spiritual deceit, much of the Church is curled up in the corner, waiting for the bell to save them.

The Final Round Begins Now

But this match isn’t over.

Stolen Rainbow: The Great Unmasking is the Church’s training camp — and the bell that signals Round One of a comeback.

Because let’s be clear: we’re not fighting Gilbert Baker anymore.
He died in 2017.

But the spirit he carried — the one that mocked God, desecrated the sacred, and paraded sin beneath a stolen covenant — is alive and well.

And it still hates the Church.

This isn’t just a cultural fight. It’s a spiritual one.

It’s Ephesians 6.
It’s 2 Thessalonians 2.
It’s Revelation 13.

And it’s time for the Church to get back in the ring.

No More Shadowboxing

We don’t need more “dialogue.”
We don’t need more diversity panels.

We need pastors who preach the Word with fire.
Parents who train up their children in truth.
Christians who fear God more than being called names.

We need pulpits to stop waving white flags and start sounding the trumpet.

“Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” — James 4:7
“Be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might.” — Ephesians 6:10

This isn’t just about reclaiming a symbol.

It’s about reclaiming courage.

Step into the Fight — September 25

Join us in Washington, D.C. at the Republican Capitol Hill Club for the world premiere of Stolen Rainbow: The Great Unmasking.

It’s not just a documentary.
It’s the Church’s wake-up call.

The final round has begun.

Let’s stop flinching.
Let’s stop ducking.
And let’s throw the truth like a knockout punch.

Because the rainbow belongs to God — and we’re taking it back.

I hope to see you there! Martin Mawyer, president, Christian Action Network.

AUTHOR

Martin Mawyer

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Final call. To attend, visit christianaction.org/stolen-rainbow-rsvp-film-premiere/

Please visit the Majority Report substack.

Our Healthcare System is a Mess

By John Droz, Jr.

As most of us know by now, there was a contentious Senate hearing last week with Bobby Kennedy (RFKjr), Secretary of DHHS. If we just read mainstream media (e.g., here) or listened to the Democrat Senators attacking a fellow Democrat, one might well conclude that the American public was being endangered by RFKjr and his appointees at various federal health agencies.

This is typical sleight-of-hand tactics by anti-American parties. Critical Thinking citizens will not be fooled by their shiny objects.

What is really being debated is extremely significant: who controls your medical decisions (e.g., illness treatments, vaccines, etc.)? There are two primary choices: Bureaucrats or You. The condensed arguments for each:

This has been the US model for some time now. There are several reasons why this came about, like: a) power, b) money, and c) arrogance.

US Healthcare involves Trillions of dollars when all aspects are considered, plus it is a major influence on hundreds of millions of citizens’ lives. It doesn’t take much imagination to realize that there will be a LOT of self-serving parties who want control of this money or control over this power. They surreptitiously bring this about by making us dependent on them.

The third reason is based on their arrogant underlying assumption that most citizens are ignorant. In other words, they believe that most Americans do not have the competence to make important health decisions for themselves or their family. (Not surprisingly, these same people are behind the purposeful dumbing down of students in K-12!)

Their solution for all of these concerns is to mandate that citizens defer to “experts” (e.g., Dr. Fauci) as they are much smarter than you. (How many peer-reviewed studies have you published?) To make sure that citizens adhere to “expert” views, punishments for non-compliance can be severe.

Of course there are profoundly serious liabilities with this system. For example, an indisputable fact is that the bureaucrats know very little about you. Another fact is that these “experts” may have other priorities than your health (e.g., power or personal financial gain). These and other fatal flaws of this model are summarily dismissed as insignificant, irrelevant, etc.

NB: It’s not that federal agencies do not understand the informed consent issue, because in scientific trials they require that all study participants sign (and are protected by) a sixty-one page Informed Consent document! Why is there not some similar document or concern for the public who use (sometimes by mandate) the byproducts of said studies?

A good name for this is the Informed Consent model. This starts with you choosing medical practitioners whom you trust to work with.

When medical options are available (e.g., whether or not to get a COVID-19 injection), federal (and State) health agencies would give you and your medical practitioners full disclosure about all applicable scientific studies. That way, you would be able to make an informed choice as to what was in your best interest, based on scientifically determined efficacy and safety.

Under the current Bureaucratic Boss model, this individuality is strongly discouraged. To begin with, bureaucrats make sure that the information you are officially given is usually inaccurate and missing key data. (See the eight points below for examples.) Their objective is to make it extremely difficult for citizens to do informed consent. COVID-19 clearly exposed this.

Part of the issue last week was that certain Senators objected to the fact that RFKjr is supporting an Informed Consent model, which they oppose.

A more subtle (but related) fight going on is about Science. The Bureaucratic Boss advocates (most of the medical establishment) are aware that if they published all the scientific studies on key medical issues in a readable format (e.g., the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 masks), then you and your medical practitioners could make informed decisions without their involvement!

They are diametrically opposed to that happening!

Their tactic is to muddy the scientific information to make it almost indecipherable to the public. This is part of common deception tactics by anti-Science parties. Since it is effective, it is used in many other fields (e.g., our energy options, climate change, K-12 Science education, etc.).

Their strategy is based on the documented reality that 99%± of the American public does not understand Science. This means that self-serving parties can make blatantly political claims and call them “scientific,” assured that the public will not understand the extent of the deception they are being fed.

For example, these anti-science parties are objecting to the removal of some government mandates for select injections. They are saying the RFKjr will make things worse — as if DHHS matters were already good! The reality is that RFKjr inherited a situation where tens of millions of Americans have been getting inferior health services from government agencies. Consider:

  1. Some medical mandates (e.g., COVID-19 injections) were made WITHOUT the scientifically required long-term safety tests.
  2. The COVID-19 injections were dishonestly sold to the public regarding effectiveness. Relative Risk Reduction (95%±) was used, when Absolute Risk Reduction (1%±) was the scientifically appropriate value that the public should have been told. Note the enormous difference!
  3. The whole EUA process (how COVID-19 injections got authorized) was corrupted and unscientific. The incompetence is easier to understand by looking at COVID-19 treatments. E.g., Remdesivir got an EUA (with Scientific studies concluding that its effectiveness is LESS THAN ZERO) while Ivermectin was not granted an EUA (even though Scientific studies concluded that its effectiveness is over 60%). ‘Nuff said.
  4. The majority of Americans have one or more chronic diseases, yet some of these mandates (e.g., for COVID-19) were made WITHOUT the scientifically required tests on such subjects. (E.g., my wife has Parkinson’s. There do not appear to have been any studies done of the effects of COVID-19 injections on Parkinson’s patients, prior to them being widely mandated.)
  5. The “government” not only did not inform Americans that there were scientifically proven treatments that could substantially reduce COVID-19 fatalities (e.g., Vitamin D, HCQ, etc), but medical professionals who recommended such treatments were punished. This resulted in 600,000± Americans unnecessarily dying. Who is being held responsible for this carnage?
  6. The CDC’s position regarding COVID-19 masks was entirely without scientific basis. In fact, over a hundred scientific studies have been published that conclude that COVID-19 masks are ineffective and/or unsafe. As of today, the CDC has not acknowledged these.
  7. Almost the entire US medical establishment acted in an unscientific manner during the COVID-19 matter. As such, RFKjr expects widespread pushback from said parties when he exposes their abandonment of scientific principles.
  8. RFKjr is also quite concerned that the “government” is currently advising parents of babies to give them almost FORTY (40!) injections by the time they are TWO (2) years old. (See chart below.) The Science issue is not the potential value of any one of these individual shots, but rather that there have been ZERO scientific studies done that assess the long-term health risks to these babies from the combination of these 40± injections. However, anyone who questions the absurdity of this situation is quickly labelled an anti-vaxxer. Scientist should be skeptical, so thank you RFKjr!

Click here to view the Your child needs vaccines as they grow! infographic

RFKjr is taking on an entire industry that has completely lost its direction — as it is now frequently not acting in the best interest of the US public.

Not only have federal health agencies (and their allies) adopted an anti-citizen model, but their “experts” have become untethered from real Science. In other words, the official advice from the medical establishment is now severely compromised by incompetence and self-serving dealings.

The Critically Thinking conclusions from last week’s hearings are that the Senators making the most noise: 1) are likely diametrically opposed to the informed consent healthcare model, 2) appear to have little understanding of real Science, and 3) are probably attempting to discredit RFKjr, because if the public gets informed of the full extent of the COVID-19 malfeasance, they are afraid that they will be among those held accountable.

Let’s be clear: like every other American citizen, RFKjr is not a perfect person. He has said and done some inappropriate things. That said, by-and-large, what he is doing at DHHS is long overdue and (on average) will be a major net benefit to American citizens.

So remember that the raucous anti-RFKjr noise is intended to distract non Critically Thinking citizens from realizing that he is taking this abuse for us.

PS — Please call your federal reps and indicate your support for RFKjr.

©2025  All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.