For several years now I have been playing the role of Paul Revere. In response, a few have shouted out support, but most have chosen to just roll over and go back to sleep. Almost none have gotten up to take meaningful ACTION.

The plan to take down America is no secret.

It is to dumb down our 50 million K-12 children and to remove all traces of Critical Thinking from them. That’s it!

Our anti-American opponents have great patience in executing this long-term strategy. Because it is a multi-year campaign, most people are either oblivious to what is going on, or skeptical that it will work. WAKE UP!

Essentially EVERYTHING bad that is transpiring is directly due to what is going on in our K-12 education system. A lot of people complain, but only a tiny number of citizens are willing to do something meaningful about it.

The objective of America’s enemies is to see to it that U.S. voting citizens are so mindless — and have such short memories — that they will voluntarily vote against their own best interests!

I don’t know what other evidence you need, but for citizens to vote for socialists due to temporarily high gasoline prices is insanity defined.

I encourage you to read more carefully what I wrote a few weeks ago. Make SURE that you attentively watch that 5-minute video, as it says it well.

A bit of hope

I know that there are many good people out there.

They need to fully appreciate that we are literally in a war — WW III. Yes, I also spelled this out before. Again, the result was bluster, not ACTION.

Despite all the evidence here, I remain an optimist. One positive take on this fiasco is that maybe — just maybe — some of the coming absurdities will wake up enough voters so that a big correction happens in 2028.

Your call…

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

PS: Pictures were designed by John and drawn by ChatGPT.

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

In that vein I am reposting this excellent piece, written by Joshua Arnold. With voting coming up shortly, it is critically important to remember what he is writing, during this time when politicians are soliciting citizen votes…

——————————————————————————

Some progressive politicians have awoken to the fact that their far-left language is hurting them with voters, reports Axios. Terms like “birthing people” (women), “unhoused people” (homeless), “criminal justice-impacted individuals” (inmates), and “substance abuse disorder” (addiction) are just plain weird and make officials who use them seem out of touch. At a Michigan Democratic fundraising dinner in April, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear (D) urged candidates present to “talk like a normal human.” That should be a low bar to clear.

Yet some left-wing activists and the politicians who need their endorsements go on endlessly about “allyship,” “people experiencing food insecurity,” “Latinx,” and “equity.”

Beshear is not the only Democrat to make this point. Senator Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) recently argued, “‘social equity’ — why do we say that? Why don’t we say, ‘We want you to have an even chance’?” Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel advised his party to “ignore the culture police.” Even California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) keeps urging Democrats to become more “culturally normal,” advice he could well afford to follow.

In fact, some Democrats have been pointing out the problem ever since their electoral loss. “Some words are just too Ivy League-tested terms,” Gallego complained in a May 2025 Washington Post article. The same piece quoted Beshear in harmony, “Democrats have begun to speak like professors and started using advocacy-speak. … It makes Democrats or candidates using this speech sounding like they’re not normal.”

In August 2025, the Democratic group Third Way published a memoto “All Who Wish to Stop Donald Trump and MAGA” to stop using several dozen ridiculous terms. “For a party that spends billions of dollars trying to find the perfect language to connect to voters, Democrats and their allies use an awful lot of words and phrases no ordinary person would ever dream of saying,” they said. “To please the few, we have alienated the many — especially on culture issues, where our language sounds superior, haughty and arrogant.”

Thus far, few Democrats have heeded the appeals of their fellow partisans to be normal. Days after the Third Way memo, the Democratic National Committee unanimously approved a resolution in support of DEI.

The bizarre vocabulary has even made its way out of rhetoric and into policy. Last year, the public library in Baton Rouge, La. fired a bi-vocational pastor who refused to use the preferred pronouns of a trans-identifying coworker. In June 2026, the New York legislature enacted a bill that did nothing but replace 22 instances of “father” and “mother” in family law with “gestating parent” or “non-gestating parent.”

And the hits keep coming. This year, Rep. Wesley Bell (D-Mo.) introduced a bill to replace the term “ex-felon” in law with “qualified criminal justice-impacted individual.” In January, Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.) announced a joint resolution that recognized health systems who helped “birthing individuals” and “birthing people.” In May, Governor Newsom announced new apartment space in Los Angeles for “formerly unhoused people.”

As far-left candidates associated with the Democratic Socialists of America continue to steamroll their way through Democratic primaries, the party is likely to drift even further to the left.

A handful of self-aware leftists are right to observe the problem with their language. Successful politicians practice making their ideas sound normal and acceptable, not weird and extreme. By letting “‘advocacy speak’ seep into our Democratic language,” said Beshear, politicians on the Left “make it feel like we’re talking down to people, like we’re talking at them, instead of to them.”

But the weird language is a symptom of weird ideas. And politicians like Beshear are proposing a cosmetic change to their agenda, not a systemic one. “The idea [behind woke language] was, we reduce stigma,” he said. “But we don’t reduce stigma by changing words. We reduce stigma by changing parts.” To put it differently, Beshear will shed the woke words if it means getting to implement the woke ideas behind them.

If anything, the leftist push to revise its language is an exercise in insincerity. The Left wants to change what it says without changing what it means. It recognizes that its words are offensive and off-putting to Americans. Good. It must also recognize that its ideas are just as unacceptable. So, why does it continue to push them? And will Americans be hoodwinked?

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

First, THANK YOU to the few hundred readers who took the time to vote in my Poll. The result is that Textbook Cover #4 was the clear winner. (#1 and #3 were tied for second.) We will work on tweaking #4 to accommodate some good suggestions. For example, the signs for each of the possible paths might say for one direction “Challenging / Critical Thinking” and for the other “Easy Street / Conformity”.} I plan on building on Robert Frost’s insightful (and very applicable) observation:

————————————————————————————————————————

Second, this is a spot-on addition to my recent two commentaries about how Most Americans are Clueless (see here and here).

Read it and then see my brief remarks after…

The Bottom Line

This insightful comic strip appeared on Sunday, August 14, 2011… Kudos to Gary Trudeau for putting his finger directly on “Critical Thinking”!

What has changed in the 15 years since then? Things have gotten much worse!

I attribute most of that to the fact that despite many States officially saying that they support Critical Thinking, ZERO States have any K-12 course where they formally teach Critical Thinking. In the meantime, the Left has made sure that the propaganda in other courses has been ratcheted up.

Colleges and universities are reportedly bastions where many very smart people are employed by or affiliated with — so how can they be so clueless?

Well, for one thing, most of these elites are Left-leaning, so the concept of actually teaching their students to be Critical Thinkers is anathema to them.

Again, it points out why the fix for this is in K-12, NOT in higher-ed!

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

One big question is: what should be the cover? Below are our top five candidates. At the end, please vote as to which one you like the best. Feel free (as always) to add comments.

{Notes: The final Cover will have quality typesetting, etc, so the question here is just: which background do you like the best?… The poll will only be available for three (3) days… Please just vote once…}

Cover #1 (Questionmark Stairway)

Cover #2 (Student with Questionmark)

Cover #3 (Lightbulb with Questionmark)

Cover #4 (Student at Crossroads)

Cover #5 (Student w Landscape)

Thank you for voting!

Remember, this is all about making a sizable improvement in our K-12 education system.

Although this sample cover says Tennessee, a slightly different version will be available for every State. Additionally, a slightly modified version of this book will also be available for Private K-12 schools and Homeschools. Regarding the latter, we will soon be setting up a website dedicated to Homeschooling…

PS — Per my prior Substack commentaries, Tennessee was selected as the first State to make inroads in, due to its political makeup. The textbook is intended for ALL States, private schools, and homeschoolers.

PPS — If you don’t like any of my efforts (!), please send your actual proposed finished cover along to me, via my email <aaprjohn@northnet.org>. If you need help, ask ChatGPT!

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

Since “short memory” is a common ailment, here is a little perspective on gas:

But the much more important perspective is how trivial such issues like gas prices are when we get a Big Picture understanding of what else is going on societally.

We Don’t Get It — #1

There is almost no hope for anyone to win a lethal challenge when they have little understanding of the strategy being used against them — like in this case.

The Left’s strategy is quite simple: They are playing the Long Game. Here is a short, powerful video that conveys that message to those paying attention… {Please click on the upper Left-hand arrows to see it in full screen. Note #17.}

They are not hiding anything regarding their strategy. Instead, they are counting on the fact that we are too immersed in our phones, or other relatively small-potatoes daily activities, to see that this is the death knell of America. The 100% applicable analogy is turning up the temperature in the lobster pot 1 degree at a time. That seems innocuous, but IT WILL BE FATAL.

We Don’t Get It — #2

They are not coming for us; they are coming for our children.

Again, they have publicly stated it, but we shrug it off. (E.g., see Lenin’s quote.) Read the story about the Pied Piper — which was actually based on a true story. We all know it, but we are allowing it to happen TODAY!

We Don’t Get It — #3

What is happening in K-12 is horrifically bad — by any standard — yet we just complain about it and then go about our business.

Fifty States have a Department of Education focused on providing the best education product. All told, there are over 4 MILLION U.S. K-12 education professionals (teachers, administrators, etc.). Even though many of these are good, committed people, we continue to go downhill.

Clearly, they are lacking productive, constructive leadership. Not a single state has a top-quality K-12 education program — yet we are going to give them more power and money! That is simply mind-boggling…

Here is a short video of the type of students being produced by our K-12 education system. {Click on the upper left-hand arrows.} These are our next generation parents, doctors, lawyers, legislators, etc. Get it now?

We Don’t Get It — #4

There are easily a dozen major issues with US K-12 schools. Despite the enormous number of K-12 education professionals, none of them have published a competent list of what all these issues are. How can we solve this mess when there is no national agreement as to what the problems are?

We Don’t Get It — #5

As a physicist, I am used to dealing with complex problems. One time-tested strategy is applicable here: PRIORITIZE the list! Since there is zero agreement as to what the TOP K-12 problem is, we have literally millions of people spending time, money, and effort on secondary matters.

A good example of this is all the time, money, and effort that has gone into School Choice. It is a worthwhile effort but nowhere near the #1 problem.

We Don’t Get It — #6

You’ve heard it here before, but evidently it hasn’t registered. There is NOTHING more important in our K-12 system than Curriculum (i. e., WHAT our children are being taught). The Left knows this, and has aggressively taken over almost every K-12 subject curriculum.

A good example is what has happened with Science — 49 States (!) have adopted all or most of the NGSS, which is beyond bad. I spelled it out very clearly, but like with the Titanic, the band plays on…

How many readers have written to their State Board of Education (SBE: the people who are in charge of curriculum) and objected to the NGSS? Exactly.

We Don’t Get It — #7

There are a few who have taken the time to dig into the terrible content being taught to our children (e.g., in History, where America is portrayed as the oppressor). Thank you. Unfortunately, their response is almost always “Let’s fix what is being taught in History/Science/etc.”

In a different world, that would make some sense. However, the reality is to meaningfully fix any of these subjects (which would have to be done through the State Board of Education), it would take a decade or more. Is that practical?

We Don’t Get It — #8

Understanding that reality, hopefully you will appreciate the power of my suggestion: do an end run around these failing bureaucracies.

My suggestion is to have one (1) mandatory, full-year high school course that teaches students to be Critical Thinkers. The strategy here is simple: rather than try to fix multiple courses, add just one new course that gives students the ability to see through the propaganda they are being fed.

If that isn’t a sufficient reason, teaching students to be Critical Thinkers has a LIFETIME of MAJOR other benefits. For example, it will give them the ability to make better decisions regarding their health, their relationships, their financial choices, who they vote for, etc., etc. (See here for more.)

The Bottom Line —

Such a class should be socially acceptable. Very few educators or parents will object to teaching students to be Critical Thinkers.

FYI, if you read each State’s Education Department’s mission statement (etc.) — I have ! — MANY of them state that their objective is to graduate Critical Thinkers! However, not a single State has a formal course to do that. ZERO.

The reasons why they don’t are almost entirely administrative. First, every subject MUST have a written set of Standards (that outlines what needs to be taught at each grade level). No one has ever produced Standards for a K-12 Critical Thinking Course. I have! (And it’s free for any SBE member.)

Second, every subject MUST have a quality student Textbook (that reflects what is in the Standards). Since there are zero Standards for such a course, there is no Textbook. I have (just this week) finished a 300+ page Textbook!

Third, every subject MUST have a quality Teacher Handbook (that reflects what is in the Standards). Since there are zero Standards for such a course, there is no such Teacher Handbook. I will have this done next month!

In plain English, I want our school systems to change from teaching children “WHAT to think” to “HOW to think.” Simple but profound.

The brief, understated summary of this situation is that we have a 5-alarm fire. So you decide: are you going to allow America to lose WWIII — or are you going to speak up and act to make sure that does NOT happen?

PS — An example of action proportionate to the threat is the email I received from a college Science professor. He teaches in Texas and has conveyed to me the deplorable state of incoming freshmen. I told him that I was starting with TN to get them to mandate a year-long Grade 9 class. He wrote me back:

“I think this is very important, and it is great that Tennessee might be the vanguard of a transformation of the United States educational system.

“If it would be useful for me to move to Tennessee to be on your team to spearhead this effort, I would consider quitting my job and doing that.”

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

—————————————————————————————

A quiet but significant shift is underway in corporate America. A large majority of Fortune 500 companies have stepped back from formal DEI programs in recent years. Many will not return, not because they oppose diversity, but because they’ve realized that the current framework of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) is itself inherently discriminatory.

Recent diversity efforts have focused almost exclusively on race, gender, and ethnicity. While these characteristics matter, they have proven too narrow. Research has consistently shown that teams balanced by race and gender often produce results virtually indistinguishable from less diverse teams when the individuals share similar ages, education, socio-economic backgrounds, and cultural experiences. In short, surface-level diversity frequently fails to deliver meaningful differences in how people think and solve problems.

The real power of diversity lies in something much harder to measure but far more valuable: diversity of thought, personality, perspective, spiritual beliefs, and problem-solving style.

Graphic Citation

When everyone in the room sees the world through a similar lens — even if they look different — true innovation suffers. Companies that limit their definition of diversity to demographic checkboxes often end up with people who think remarkably alike. That’s not diversity. That’s conformity wearing different faces.

Real diversity challenges assumptions. It brings together people who approach problems differently, question conventional wisdom, and offer competing ideas. This kind of cognitive diversity is what actually drives better decisions, creativity, and adaptability in a global marketplace.

The same pattern is now visible at the local level. In Apex, North Carolina, town officials reported that people of color on staff rose from 6% to 23% in roughly a year, while 45% of leadership roles were held by women. During the same period, the town’s workforce expanded from about 368 employees to between 647 and 762. Meanwhile, the resident population grew from roughly 47,000 to 80,000±, and the White non-Hispanic share of residents fell from about 76% to about 67%, with Asian residents rising sharply. The demographic composition of the workforce shifted faster than the community it serves, yet there is no public evidence that this produced better decisions, stronger services, or more innovative problem-solving.

Organizations serious about real diversity should follow four practical steps:

First, measure not just demographics but prevailing attitudes, assumptions, and barriers to different thinking styles.

Second, define clear goals for what broader diversity should achieve.

Third, change hiring and promotion practices to actively seek people with different personalities and approaches rather than hiring clones of those already in the organization, including not hiring people that are radically different from the ones they are replacing.

And fourth, measure results based on actual business outcomes, not just representation numbers.

This broader view of diversity does not replace concern for race and gender. It expands it. The goal is to create teams where people genuinely see problems differently and are willing to challenge one another’s assumptions. That is the environment where real innovation happens.

Corporate America is at an inflection point. The more recent model of diversity driven by DEI no longer works. The companies that will thrive in the coming decade are those willing to pursue a more honest and ambitious form of diversity: diversity of thought.

Leaders who understand this distinction and act on it will build stronger, more innovative, and more adaptable organizations. Those who don’t will continue to chase demographic targets while wondering why their results remain mediocre.

In recent news, Nike is an obvious example of “failing up” by making their diversity numbers while simultaneously losing record profits to the point of being removed from S&P 100.

The choice is no longer between diversity and merit. The real choice is between superficial diversity that checks boxes and meaningful diversity that delivers results.

Stephen Xavier is a business consultant and executive coach who has worked with America’s Fortune 500 corporations for nearly two decades. He has been widely published and his media credits include The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Financial Times, and Forbes.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

———————————————————

Alexandra Fasulo’s attacks on New York solar have reached the NY governor’s race and Washington, DC.

Alexandra Fasulo’s wide-reaching anti-solar posts over the past year have bedeviled New York policymakers and, increasingly, become a line of attack in the race for governor. | Christopher Lee/The New York Times/Redux

By MARIE J. FRENCH

09/26/2026

ALBANY, New York — In early July, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins sat down in the White House Mess with an unlikely guest: a New York influencer who has attracted a national following attacking solar energy projects on farmland.

Alexandra Fasulo has no training in farming or professional background in energy policy. The upstate New York resident has been a political firebrand — embracing President Donald Trump’s claims of election fraud, posting about an impending civil war, etc..

But her wide-reaching anti-solar posts over the past year — with more than 2 million followers across platforms — have bedeviled New York policymakers and, increasingly, become a line of attack in the race for governor.

The White House visit came just a week after Rollins, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and country singer John Rich — whom Trump named in June as special envoy for American landowners, a post aimed at fighting solar and wind on farmland — sent a letter on June 26 to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul demanding answers to questions that mirrored concerns raised by Fasulo.

Rich has said publicly that her posts are what brought New York’s solar buildout to his attention. The influencer said on her blog that she shared extensive information with Rich before the letter was sent, although Fasulo said she had no role in drafting the actual inquiry. And Rollins highlighted Fasulo’s blog in a Sept. 23 X post celebrating the cancellation of a 300 megawatt solar project opposed by the influencer and local officials including Democratic state Sen. Pat Fahy.

“It still feels surreal in a lot of ways that me crashing out on the internet consistently for about 10 months finally produced some type of result,” Fasulo said on a conservative Substack podcast shortly after the White House gathering. “When I was standing there, when I was eating lunch in the White House, it absolutely felt surreal.”

The 33-year-old’s warnings about foreign companies “taking over” farmland voluntarily leased by property owners have become talking points for Trump officials and Bruce Blakeman, the Republican nominee for governor of New York.

Fasulo appeared with Blakeman in a campaign ad, with the Nassau County Executive declaring “no more solar on farmland” if he’s elected. Similar sentiments have buttressed his attacks on Hochul’s energy policy and become a rhetorical staple of his campaign. Blakeman appeared with Fasulo in April in Albany County, called solar projects under construction in Genesee County a “total scam” on a July campaign stop in Batavia and rallied with Sullivan County officials opposing a solar project there in August.

“People say don’t bring politics into this but … this is inherently political,“ Fasulo said in an interview with POLITICO. “As it currently stands, our current governor is all for the destruction of our land for solar and wind.”

The issue of whether — and where — to build renewables is an increasingly partisan battleground nationally. Solar built on farmland has been slammed for taking away productive agricultural land by Republican candidates for governor in California, Michigan, Wisconsin and Tennessee.

Solar is another flashpoint where Trump’s actions could undermine Hochul’s “all of the above” energy agenda that prioritizes new generation and affordability. The Democratic governor has clashed repeatedly with the president over offshore wind while seeking alignment on nuclear energy.

Hochul’s administration has pushed back on concerns about solar on farmland, pointing out in a July 24 letter responding to the Trump administration inquiry that only 0.13% of prime farmland is impacted by state-permitted projects. But state officials have struggled to mount a comparable response to the growing online and media furor over solar policies, a gap the renewable industry has been pressing them to close.

Michael Abboud, a spokesperson for the USDA, declined to answer questions about the basis of the letter sent to the Hochul administration or Fasulo’s meeting with Rollins.

“We stand firmly behind the letter,” Abboud said. “The concerns it raised remain valid and urgent: the systematic conversion of highly productive farmland into industrial solar installations under a state process that prioritizes speed over long-term agricultural integrity, local control, and the character of rural communities.”

The renewable industry is pushing the state to mount a more effective defense and scrambling to amplify more pro-solar voices on social media. A national solar trade group in August launched an ad campaign to counteract Fasulo’s narrative.

Marguerite Wells, executive director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, the renewable industry’s state trade group, said historically the renewable energy industry relied on the clout of the environmental movement, which has waned. Now, the industry needs to make the case on economics as well. She said:

“We don’t have to rest just on the climate change message. It’s also just, ‘Oh we need new electrons and we need cost-effective electrons.’”

Siting divide

While solar is cheaper to build than other new forms of energy, it takes up more land than conventional power plants. The transition of thousands of acres of land from open fields, forests or grasslands to fenced-in solar arrays is an affront to Fasulo — and many upstate New York residents fighting projects in their communities.

Fasulo purchased land in upstate New York after a hurricane destroyed her home in Florida in 2022. Before becoming concerned about the proliferation of solar projects in the state, she mainly posted about her work on her seven-acre property.

“I’m a huge environmentalist, conservationist, animal lover, like a crazy one,” Fasulo said. “I have a tattooed turtle on my back, so it’s like I’m Team Earth here.”

Fasulo’s nonprofit, the American Land Rescue Fund, has raised more than $100,000 in less than a year and filed three lawsuits against the state seeking public records and challenging siting rules for transmission projects.

She echoes criticism that upstate Republicans have leveled for years at New York’s energy policy: that new renewables sited in their communities destroy the land’s rural character and only benefits New York City.

“We’re districts in the Hunger Games, bled dry for those in costumes over in the Capitol that laugh as they give our best land to foreign corporations,” Fasulo wrote in one post. “I will never, ever forgive these people. They are anti-human, anti-environment, and anti-God.”

Fasulo often makes sweeping claims about specific solar projects and the industry as a whole. There are her concerns about those foreign-owned companies “destroying” land that landowners have leased for the projects. She’s concerned less with the impacts of human-caused climate change — a scientific consensus she’s skeptical of — than the more immediate ecological and societal impacts of building renewables.

Her primary target is New York state’s Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES). Established under Gov. Andrew Cuomo to speed up renewable permits to support New York’s energy goals, the office has now issued permits for 30 solar projects and six wind projects.

“ORES must be dissolved and anyone responsible for its creation must be called out and voted out of office. Period,” Fasulo posted.

Upstate Republican lawmakers, local government associations and residents fighting renewables in their communities have long opposed the office’s authority to override local laws in certain circumstances.

Fasulo’s efforts have drawn praise from Rep. Elise Stefanik and two upstate Republican congressional candidates, Kailee Buller and state Sen. Pete Oberacker.

Some Democratic lawmakers have also expressed reservations about covering productive farmland with renewables. Rep. Josh Riley, who is running for reelection in a competitive seat, recently echoed concerns similar to those raised by Fasulo about the state’s siting process.

Opposition to solar projects is often bipartisan in affected communities.

“Generally I vote for Democrats, but this is a Hochul project,” said Jean Halloran, who splits her time between New York City and her home near a proposed solar project in Copake.

“It seems to me wrong to assume that every single project that applies to ORES for a permit is environmentally sound,” she said. “We shouldn’t take our decades of environmental legislation and regulation and practice and throw it under the bus in order to build a few renewable energy electricity production facilities.”

Who speaks for farmers

Fasulo’s arguments — and those of other critics of solar on leased farms — at once lionize and infantilize New York’s farmers. They are both the essential backbone to feed society, emblematic of a way of life under threat, stewards of the land — and also incapable of reviewing legal contracts to lease their land.

For some farmers, solar and wind leases can be a financial lifeline. They can also open up grazing land for farmers seeking to grow their operations.

“The biggest threat to farmland, in my opinion, is not solar. It’s farms going bankrupt and going out of business. It’s real estate development; it’s suburban development,” said Rebekah Pierce, who operates J&R Pierce Family Farm in Clinton County which grazes sheep on solar projects.

The renewable industry and state officials emphasize that farmers should be able to lease their land for solar if they want.

“Private property owners have the legal right to make decisions about their own property,” said Jason Zehr, interim executive director at the Office of Renewable Energy Siting. “Farmers are not being forced to build renewable energy projects on their property. They’re choosing to do that.”

Small, independent farms in New York are vanishing at a higher rate than the national average, according to Comptroller Tom DiNapoli’s office. Between 2024 and 2025, the state lost 500 farms and 100,000 acres of farmland, according to federal data. Eighty percent of those were farms with under $100,000 in revenue.

Rising labor costs and volatile commodity prices have made an always challenging business even more backbreaking.

Farmland is at greater risk from other types of development than solar, according to state and federal data. Solar facilities in agricultural districts represented just 0.5% of farmland lost from 2017 to 2022, according to another DiNapoli report.

‘You are my enemy’

While Fasulo has steered clear of more extreme political statements as she ramped up her solar posts, that wasn’t always the case.

In a previous life — before she moved from New York City to Florida — Fasulo was an officer for the New York Young Republican Club and ran its social media accounts in 2019 and 2020.

On her own since-deleted Twitter account, Fasulo posted frequently about politics and the 2020 election. Dozens of social media posts reviewed by POLITICO show a deep-seated distrust of the results of the presidential election.

The posts include declaring Fox News an “enemy of the people,”multiple sexualized insults aimed at conservative commentator Megyn Kelly, accusing Democrats of treason and calls for civil war.

“When you believe in destroying America, aborting children, taking God out of school, defunding the police, and worshipping Satan, we have nothing in common. You are my enemy,” she wrote on Nov. 14, 2020.

Shortly before moving to Florida, in a since-deleted Instagram video obtained by POLITICO, Fasulo criticized New York City, and then went further in attacking New York City’s mayor at the time.

“Bill de Blasio should be publicly eliminated from this planet,” she said.

Asked about these comments and her previous posts, Fasulo said on X that POLITICO planned a “character assassination” of her.

“It’s a sad time today, a time in which journalists will stoop to commenting on your past character when they can’t refute the claims and the facts you’re sharing with the public,” Fasulo wrote. “But as I said in the beginning of this, if that’s what I have to weather to save our rural towns and the animals caught in the crossfire here, then so be it.”

Some of Fasulo’s followers have made comments on her posts advocating violence against state officials, including some that have been reported to state police.

“What we see is this spread of misinformation about the work that we do has resulted in some online threats to staff, employees, which is inexcusable,” Zehr said. “She bears some responsibility here.”

Fasulo said she does not endorse violence and deletes any threats she sees. The influencer said she has her own safety concerns.

“I’ve had people write very scary things to me over things related to this,” Fasulo said. “They don’t care. This is the government versus a 5-foot-3 girl. It’s hysterical.”

Transparency concerns

ORES holds public hearings on proposed projects, takes public comments and posts many filings online. But Fasulo has accused the agency of redacting too much information about endangered species impacted by projects, a policy ORES officials say is required by state law.

She first started to scrutinize the agency’s process during the siting of the Fort Edward Solar project several miles from her land in upstate New York, which she purchased in 2023.

The now-permitted project affects grasslands in a region known for hosting endangered birds, although the final conditions require the developer to submit a net conservation benefit plan to offset those impacts.

The influencer traveled to Albany twice — in November 2025 and January 2026 on the day of the governor’s State of the State address — to try to get an in-person meeting with someone at the agency but was turned away. In a February update to her followers, Fasulo claimed she’d never heard back from any ORES officials.

“No one has emailed,” Fasulo said in the video posted on Feb. 12, 2026.

But Fasulo told POLITICO she did receive an email from an ORES official after the January visit, before posting that video. The email, obtained by POLITICO through a public records request, included information about agreeing to confidentiality provisions to view redacted information — and also offered to schedule a meeting.

Fasulo said she never responded and instead forwarded it to her attorney.

“At this point I’ve emailed them so many times. Why bother?” she said. “I had to start going through my attorney because they escorted me out of the building when I tried to meet with them.”

Fasulo has claimed that solar developers are stripping topsoil from farmland while building their projects and moving it offsite. She shares videos or photos of construction activity and dumpsters with what appears to be dirt or other material in it.

But state permits don’t allow developers to remove topsoil from the site. It is required to be stripped for the construction of roads and some other components, but has to be stored on site and eventually restored upon decommissioning. The state requires an on-site agricultural monitor to be on location while construction is happening to ensure the rules are followed.

“There’s an agricultural inspector on site every day to make sure that doesn’t happen, because that’s against the law. It’s against the permit. It’s against what the farmer would want,” Wells said. “You want the topsoil there. It’s expensive to cart it away. No one would do that, but she can claim it, and it’s very hard to refute in the moment.”

Fasulo plans to continue her work opposing solar projects and scrutinizing state agency decisions. But her influence is now reverberating far beyond Albany.

Fasulo said she’s had phone calls and other private communications with Rich, outside of the trip to D.C., although she declined to discuss any specifics.

“My issue is with the scale, the size of this,” Fasulo said. “If the wind and solar took up 10 acres at a time, you wouldn’t even know my name. I would just be minding my own business here. But when you perimeter fence off 3,000 acres at a time, and I see all the roadkill from the animals that can’t get around it, then I get mad.”

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

It’s fascinating to see how some politicians seem to have easily switched their pending “apocalypse” fear campaign from climate to AI doom. It brings to mind this famous advice: “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you…”

How Morality is Involved —

The concerns about Artificial Intelligence (AI) seem largely focused on the harm that “escaped” AIDEs (Artificial Intelligence Deployment Example) can and have done.

Let’s Critically Think about that for a few minutes…

I have not seen this discussed anywhere, but it seems that there is a strong argument to be made that this is a religious (moral) issue. Why do I say that?

Have you seen any reports that “escaped” AIDEs went about doing good? (For example, have you seen any headlines like “Escaped AI agents join forces to cure Parkinson’s”?)

Let’s see if we (a group of Critical Thinkers?) can come up with meaningful insight as to why AIDEs would almost exclusively be doing BAD things.

AIDEs Mirror Our Society —

IMO, the fundamental reason is that AIDEs are trained by exposing them to an enormous amount of societal data (e.g., mainstream media articles). In other words, the views of most AIDE’s will be what our current society’s primary views are. If there are thousands of articles that are wrong about something (e.g., COVID), then most AIDEs will likewise be wrong on that topic.

Note that I said “most” AIDEs, as there are a few exceptions, like AlterAI.

From the morality perspective, we know that our society is now swamped with two primary indoctrinations: 1) victimhood, and 2) relativism.

1 - Victimhood is when a group of people claims that they are systematically oppressed by another group. For example, poor people say they are victimized by well-off people, women say they are victimized by men, minorities say they are victimized by whites, immigrants say they are victimized by citizens, etc., etc. Once you look at the world in such a distorted binary fashion, essentially everyone is oppressed by somebody!

2- Relativism is when individuals discard all universal standards (e.g., Judeo-Christian — like the Ten Commandments), and say that it is instead up to each person to determine what’s right and wrong for them. (Note: this is closely related to being amoral.)

What should be extremely concerning is that not only is mainstream media actively promoting both of these inaccurate and divisive views to citizens, but both of these errors are also being conveyed in US K-12 public schools to our children. What could go wrong?

FYI: Who benefits when America is fractured into warring subgroups, and when American citizens abandon the values that were the basis for the U.S. Constitution? Obviously, the enemies of America.

Our AI Expectations?

Ideally, we would like AI agents (AIDEs) to be intelligent and moral.

But most of us would say that we would like the same for our children — to teach them to be intelligent and moral. How are we doing with that?

K-12 is purposefully dumbing our children down, and it is also injecting them with relativism and an oppression complex — so a failure on all counts. How many people are going public about those major societal destructions?

Instead of worrying about regulating AIDEs, why aren’t we properly regulating our K-12 schools — a matter a hundred times more important!

The Bottom Line:

We should NOT be surprised when AIDEs: 1) have a severely distorted, mainstream-media-fabricated mentality, 2) are angry at fictitious oppression, and 3) justify any reaction as being what relativism entitles them to?

This may be God’s punishment for our arrogant and foolish mistakes.

He’ll say: “So you want no moral standards? Then the ‘robots’ you make will also have no moral standards — which means that they will come for you. You will then reap the harvest that you have sown.”

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

There are few pressing societal issues more consequential than our proper dealing with the explosion of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Let’s see if we (a group of Critical Thinkers?) can come up with a meaningful answer to a profoundly important question: Is AI regulation needed — and, if so, what?

The challenge here is that this is a very complicated problem. My strategy for Critically Thinking about complicated issues is to first try to simplify things.

Simplification Step #1

We need to recognize that there are two (2) major aspects of the AI issue: Development and Deployment. After we’ve grasped that, we need to identify which of these two we have the greatest concern with — as that would be where we would consider regulating. IMO, the answer is Deployment.

It’s somewhat like the initial development of a gun. A gun can be used for good or bad. As such, our gun regulations should be focused on minimizing the bad (the deployment), while not restricting the good.

Simplification Step #2

AI is an abstract, nebulous concept to most people, so it will be easier to deal with if we can represent it in a more concrete way, using an analogy. I’m suggesting that, as a reasonable example of AI Deployment that we visualize we are dealing with a mechanical robot that is being given intelligence. To make this even less abstract, let’s name this intelligent robot: AIDE (Artificial Intelligence Deployment Example).

Simplification Step #3

For this discussion, let’s look at AIDE as being a super competent assistant who can make our life more interesting and productive. For example, our AIDE can instantly (and inexpensively) provide us with an answer to a wide variety of questions (e.g., a good recipe for a chocolate cake). Our AIDE can also quickly give us advice on a huge assortment of topics, from relationships to religion. Further, we can adjust our query on the fly. For example, if the recipe AIDE provided includes something we are allergic to, tell that to our AIDE and a revised recipe quickly and magically appears. What’s not to like?

Simplification Step #4

For starters, the evidence is mounting that reliance on our AIDE results in people being less human. Think about that… For a good discussion of some examples of this, please read this well-written article: Five (5) Dehumanizing Dangers of AI… But we’re just getting started…

Simplification Step #5

It doesn’t take too much Critical Thinking to see that relying on our AIDE can quickly become addictive. So what? The #1 concern should be that our brain is like any other muscle in our body: the less it gets used, the more likely it will atrophy and literally become impaired. This should be obvious, and research has already verified this. (Also here, here, here, etc.) What are the societal consequences of over one hundred million brain-dead Americans?

Simplification Step #6

As bad as this is, I have skipped over a BIGGIE. Up to now I’ve shown that there are several major liabilities, even with the assumption that our AIDE was giving us accurate advice. But what if it is NOT? There are two primary situations here: a) that AIDE accidentally gives us factually wrong information, or b) that AIDE knowingly gives us factually wrong information.

Let’s look at both of these cases a bit closer:

a) The evidence says that most popular AIs (AIDEs) operate in a manner that will guarantee a lot of wrong answers. Why? Because there is no “thinking” going on here. Instead, most AIs are programmed to tell us what the consensus view is — and that is frequently wrong. See my article.

b) In some cases, an AI will purposefully give more weight and evidence to one side of an argument — i.e., knowingly give us a biased answer. E.g., if the AI authors are Leftists, that will be incorporated into our AIDE.

Takeaway #1 —

I think we have gone far enough to be able to draw reasonable conclusions about our initial question: Is AI regulation needed?

It should be apparent that nothing in the first five Simplification Steps is regulatable. The sixth step has some possibilities, but how do we regulate: a) a fundamentally inferior model, or b) a politically biased model?

Takeaway #2 —

So what do we do to prevent the horrific consequences of Steps #4 & #5?

Fortunately, we have the answer: in K-12, formally teach our children to be Critical Thinkers. That gives them the most powerful tool in our arsenal: an instinctive ability to separate the wheat from the chaff.

The fact that ZERO States are doing this is simply criminal.

The Bottom Line:

It’s easy to blame politicians for not acting intelligently to protect citizens from pending threats. In this case, this is a complicated problem, so the “acting intelligently” path is not obvious to most people.

If legislators really wanted to protect us (America), their #1 priority would be to quickly get as many Americans as possible educated to be Critical Thinkers. Of course, that would result in NUMEROUS other major benefits!

Let’s hope that at least ONE State gets this, and sets an example the other States will quickly follow. This window of opportunity is rapidly closing.

————————

PS — Part 3 will briefly discuss some of the moral consequences of AI.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)

Sometimes I’ve already seen it… Sometimes it doesn’t resonate with me… Sometimes it stirs the soul.

Here is an example of the latter. I’m posting it today as it relates to 9-11…

This lengthy Atlantic article, by Jennifer Senior, won a Pulitzer Prize.

It is a wonderfully written piece about a young man (26-year-old Bobby McIlvaine) who dies in the 9-11 tragedy. In this carefully crafted story, we get to know him fairly well.

We also get to know — almost too well — his mom, his dad, his engaged girlfriend, and his brother.’ These are other, uncounted, victims.

{Bobby McIlvaine, with his parents, Helen and Bob Sr., at his Princeton graduation in 1997. Bobby’s body was found in the wreckage of the Twin Towers. (Danna Singer; original photo courtesy of the McIlvaine family.)}

The Aftermath —

The story is about how each of those people close to Bobby dealt with the terrible trauma they were subjected to. As horrific as his brutal death was, what they inflicted on each other is painfully described — in too much detail.

It’s presented in a somewhat non-conventional way. Instead of progressing chronologically, it goes back and forth, from one person to another.

Maybe it resonates with me as I have experienced a few high-speed, head-on collisions with life. I’d like to think that I came out the other side of those a better, more enlightened person because of those difficult events, but others may think differently.

In any case, if you have the time (probably an hour) to carefully read this expertly written, interesting but sad story, I think you will likely find some relevance to your own life.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

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

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about 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 2026 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!)