H/T Harley for this Guardian piece about David Hockney:
He’s voted only twice in his life – he is a British citizen who has lived much of his adult life in the United States. He noticed around his neighbourhood there was more enthusiasm for Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders than for Hillary Clinton.
“I do follow it, yes I do. But I must admit I wasn’t that keen on Hillary because when the Clintons were in the White House they banned smoking immediately.
“I said, well that would welcome Hitler a lot more than Churchill. Churchill smoked 10 cigars a day for 70 years and lived to be 90, so I don’t know what they’re going on about. And Hitler was the biggest anti-smoker of them all, you couldn’t smoke in his presence – which is why I notice in Germany there are quite a lot of smokers because they can’t demonise smokers there.”
It’s an idiosyncratic reason for a political leaning, but Hockney has been smoking since 1954 and takes delight at thumbing his nose at the demonisation of his habit.
Is it particularly idiosyncratic? It’s the exact same reason, after all, for my own political leaning. And the exact same reason I didn’t like Hillary Clinton. Smokers are freedom-lovers, and antismokers are freedom-haters. Cigarettes are little candles, little flames of freedom and hope.
Trump Victory: The Beginning of the End of Global Climate Scare
It doesn’t get better than this. Trump is one hundred percent skeptic, no pandering.
Say goodbye to the fantasy that CO2 controls the planets thermostat.
Myron Ebell may be a name we’ll be hearing a lot about.
Myron Ebell: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
1. He Says Climate Change is ‘Nothing to Worry About’
2. He Says That Even if Climate Change Were Real, It Would Be a Good Thing
3. His Think Tank Takes Money From ExxonMobil
4. Donald Trump Wants to Make Dramatic Cuts to the EPA
5. Trump Has Said That Global Warming Is a Hoax
What’s there not to like in that? And he’s rumoured to be becoming the next head of the EPA under Donald Trump. Maybe it’ll be given a really comprehensive house-cleaning?
H/T Rose for this EPA-related link:
In 1992, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a “draft” assessment of ETS and lung cancer in adults and respiratory disorders in children. Relying on weak and inconclusive epidemiological data, the supposed similarity between ETS and MS, the presence of “known or suspected carcinogens” in MS and by extrapolation in ETS, and the “biological plausibility” of an adverse relationship between ETS and health, the EPA recommended that ETS be classified as a “Group A (known human) carcinogen.” Fundamental physical and quantitative chemical differences among ETS, MS, and SS and human exposure to each smoke were disregarded: The three are not equivalent nor is ETS exposure a quantitative variant of cigarette smoking. A substantial difference in retention percentage overlays the huge dosimetric difference between exposures. As a result, the “dosage” of ETS retained is miniscule relative to MS. Also, conclusions reached by the EPA and the use of tenuous relationships as bases for Group A classification are unwarranted because of failure to consider the data upon which the “tumorigenicity” of the ETS components was based, questions on the presence and/or levels of these components in MS, and data indicating that a 25- to 30-fold decrease of a high-level dose of MS or MS condensate diminished the effects observed in bioassays from pronounced to zero, i.e., a threshold was demonstrated.