Timothy J Dunkerton

Well that’s sick

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Most of the 14th amendment debate fixates on “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” on the assumption that it must be doing meaningful work, and that is true. But the more you read the sentence, the more it becomes obvious that the real key word is “reside.” The way it’s placed almost makes it look like an afterthought, which is probably why it hasn’t received much attention. But when examined closely, any honest reader would firmly conclude that birthright citizenship is meant for residents, not illegal aliens or tourists.

John von Neumann was a brilliant mathematician, but in everyday life he could be surprisingly forgetful—almost like the classic absent-minded professor you hear about in stories. Once, when his wife was unwell, she asked him to bring her a glass of water. He went to get it, but after some time he returned empty-handed and asked her where the glasses were kept. It was a strange question, considering they had lived in that house for seventeen years. On another day, he set out from Princeton to New York City for an important meeting. But halfway through the journey, he suddenly realized he couldn’t remember who he was supposed to meet. So he stopped and called his wife, asking in complete seriousness, “Why am I going to New York?” These moments show that even one of the greatest minds could lose track of the simplest things, as if his thoughts were often too busy with bigger ideas to notice the small details of daily life.

𝐕𝐃𝐇: “𝐈𝐋𝐋𝐄𝐆𝐀𝐋 𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐄𝐍” 𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐎𝐍𝐋𝐘 𝐀𝐂𝐂𝐔𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐌 — 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐘 𝐊𝐍𝐎𝐖 𝐈𝐓 Victor Davis Hanson dismantled the left’s language game on immigration in under two minutes. A school newspaper attacked the term “illegal alien.” Hanson’s response was surgical: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘙𝘚 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮. 𝘈𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘴? 𝘈𝘭𝘱𝘩𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘎𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘬 𝘰𝘳 𝘓𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯 — 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦. 𝘠𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘴. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭? 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘓𝘦𝘹 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦. 𝘠𝘦𝘴.” The alternative — “undocumented immigrant” — tells you nothing: “𝘏𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘝𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘻𝘶𝘦𝘭𝘢. 𝘕𝘰, 𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴. 𝘏𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘥𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴. 𝘏𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴.” Then Hanson connected the dots to the real motive. He called it 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 — the “break some eggs to make the omelet” mentality: “𝘈 𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘮 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺, 𝘐 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘸𝘦’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘴 𝘶𝘱 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦’𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘵 𝘪𝘯 12 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘭-𝘪𝘯 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘵.” And the people who pay the price? Not the Democrats with security details and safe neighborhoods. The collateral. “𝘐𝘧 𝘴𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯.” 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐰.

𝐒𝐀𝐔𝐄𝐑 𝐔𝐒𝐄𝐒 𝐒𝐂𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐀’𝐒 𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐋𝐎𝐆𝐈𝐂 𝐓𝐎 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐎𝐘 𝐑𝐎𝐁𝐄𝐑𝐓𝐒’ 𝐂𝐇𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐄𝐍𝐆𝐄 𝐎𝐍 𝐁𝐈𝐑𝐓𝐇𝐑𝐈𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐂𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐙𝐄𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏 Chief Justice Roberts tried to corner Solicitor General Sauer by calling his examples “𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘬𝘺” — children of ambassadors, children of enemies during hostile invasion, children on warships. Roberts’ point: those are narrow, specific exceptions. How do you expand them to cover an entire class of illegal aliens? Sauer didn’t flinch. He reached for a principle 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐒𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐚 himself once articulated — the general rule principle. When lawmakers enact a broad legal standard, its application isn’t frozen to the specific situations they had in mind. Scalia’s example: an old theft statute written before anyone conceived of a microwave oven. Someone steals a microwave and argues he can’t be convicted because the device didn’t exist when the law was written. Scalia dismissed that. “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘢 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴.” The 14th Amendment was adopted when 𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭 as a legal concept. But the principle of allegiance-based jurisdiction was already broad enough to cover it. Sauer noted that legal commentators from 𝟏𝟖𝟖𝟏 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝟏𝟗𝟐𝟐 “𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦𝘥.” Then the a fortiori argument: if temporary visitors’ children don’t qualify, illegal entrants have an even weaker claim. Someone who enters in violation of law — a principle going back to the 𝐂𝐨𝐝𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐧 — cannot establish the legal domicile required for allegiance. 𝐑𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐬𝐤𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐤𝐲 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬. 𝐒𝐚𝐮𝐞𝐫 𝐠𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤.

Cliff Mass: Washington reservoirs are full months early as drought panic fades — and the media has nothing to say seattlered.com/weather/washin…

One of the biggest things we can do in WA to make life more affordable is to repeal the carbon tax. Energy costs anchor other costs across our economy, and the things those taxes are spent on are wasteful haven’t reduced global carbon emissions one single iota.

Über Föhne, Leistung und Deutschland. Jedes elektrische Gerät benötigt für seinen optimalen Betrieb eine bestimmte LEISTUNG. Nicht eine Energiemenge. Wenn diese Leistung P über einen gewissen Zeitraum t abgerufen wurde, dann hat das Gerät Energie verbraucht (E = P * t). Dieser Energieverbrauch ist also das RESULTAT der Nutzung und nicht etwa die Eingangsgröße. Beispiel: Der 2000 Watt Föhn, der eine halbe Stunde läuft, hat 1 kWh verbraucht. Aber selbst wenn Ihr 600 Watt Balkonkraftwerk in 10 Stunden 6 kWh erzeugt hat, hätten Sie damit den Föhn ZU KEINER ZEIT betreiben können. Weil die Leistung nicht ausreicht. Es hilft Ihnen also nicht, wenn Ihnen jemand 1 kWh schenken würde. Sie müssten fragen: Welche Leistung bekomme ich für welchen Zeitraum? Und so gilt das im großen Maßstab eben auch für Deutschland: Wir benötigen zu jeder Zeit zwischen 40.000.000.000 und 80.000.000.000 Watt Leistung. Das ist die Summe ALLER elektrischen Geräte, die gerade Strom ziehen. Daraus resultiert dann ein Verbrauch (= Energie). Wenn Politiker Ihnen aufzeigen, wie viel Energie unsere Wind- und Solaranlagen im Jahr erzeugen können, ist das ziemlich nutzlos und reiner Populismus. Der neue Windpark, für den in Ihrer Schwachwindregion der Mischwald kahlgeschlagen wird, kann nicht 10.000 Haushalte zuverlässig mit Strom versorgen. Wahrscheinlich nichtmal einen. Denn er kann die summierte Leistung der elektrischen Geräte bei Flaute nicht bedienen. Und nur darauf kommt es an. Wenn unsere Politiker diese simple Wahrheit begreifen würden, könnte schon morgen Schluss sein mit diesem Unsinn. Es ist ein Bildungsproblem.

That’s a tall order, my friend. 2015 holds the record for SSTa 3.4 May(+0) thru April(+1). You’ll also need twin ITCZ in C Pac with insane tropical cyclogenesis there.

2025 Atlantic hurricane season 13 Tropical Storms 🌀 5 Hurricanes 🟡 4 Major Hurricanes 🔴 ACE: 130.8 ✅️

🚨NEW: A recent Nature profile highlighted a scholar who made a literal river the first author of her academic papers. The profile, titled “Why I made a river my co-author,” explains that Anne Poelina gives first authorship to “a source with deep knowledge about water — the river itself.” Nature actually treats this as a serious challenge to “Western and colonial views of what knowledge is and who holds it.” It gets...more insane. The river now has an ORCID (a unique researcher ID used to track an academic’s work), so its papers and citations can be catalogued like a normal human scholar. One example (among many) is a paper in PLOS Water. In the paper's author note, we are told the “Martuwarra, RiverOfLife” is “a living Ancestor Being,” that this is a “multi-species approach,” and that the river was made the first author because “without Country, without the River… there would not be a paper.” The abstract tells readers that the paper is “led by the sacred ancestral River, Martuwarra, who is given agency as a published author,” and then the human authors explain their authority is gained through “lived experience,” kinship, friendship, and a “deep and enduring relationship.” The paper concludes by rejecting “colonial approaches” to science, makes appeals to “Mother Earth,” and a calls for an ethic of “care, love, and peace” guided by Indigenous wisdom and planetary citizenship. Our science journals have become laughingstocks.

@ChrisMartzWX Sure, there's no denying that incremental CO₂ increases the IR absorbing power. What's the end result? @tim_dunkerton says Dynamics is King. He's not wrong. The influence is negligible as energy conversion dominates in the general circulation.

🔊 My paper "The Deleted Degrees of Freedom," compressed to audio. An AI-generated walkthrough of the full paper. No equations. No footnotes. Just the argument from start to finish: 🔸 Why electrodynamics has 16 components and uses 6 🔸 The experiment that proves the deleted components are physically real (Aharonov-Bohm, 1959) 🔸 The patented industrial device that transmits through solid metal shields 🔸 What we can engineer with the remaining 10 👉 youtu.be/nUr66NO30N4 (Yeah, I usually don't like these NotebookLM generated videos as well, but I think it turned out pretty OK — helpful for those that don't have the time to read the full paper!)

There has been a huge migration of Americans from blue states to red states since Covid. The migration is so dramatic that it will significantly change the electoral college makeup, making it far more difficult for Democrats to win future Presidential elections (the electoral college will be re-apportioned after the next census) The reason is simple. While blue states have been rushing to increase taxes and regulations (e.g WA Democrats just passed an illegal 9.9% income tax), making life more unaffordable for their residents, red states have been running in the opposite direction, scrambling to lower their tax and regulatory burdens. New Hampshire recently eliminated the last vestiges of their income tax (they also have no sales tax), Mississippi enacted a phased plan to eliminate their income tax, Idaho is reducing their income tax, South Carolina passed legislation to reduce their progressive tax rate from 6% down to a flat 1.99% over time, while states like Florida, Texas and Tennessee already have no income tax and Florida is exploring plans to remove property taxes. With labor being more mobile than ever and remote work growing, red states have realized that there is a battle for talent and they're striving to be the most attractive places to move to. Blue states on the other hand are exploring how punitive their policies can be without collapsing their economies. This trend is not sustainable for blue states and will ultimately lead to an economic crisis in places like CA, WA and NY.

ALL 6 NEW ENGLAND GOVERNORS SIGN JOINT NUCLEAR STATEMENT • Nuclear supplies ~25% of New England electricity today. Governors from CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, and VT jointly commit to maintaining and building on that foundation. • Demand outlook is significant. ISO New England projects electricity consumption rising >40% over 20 years, with winter peak demand expected to double by 2045. • Clear grid signal: reliability, fuel security, and firm capacity are central concerns as demand grows and winter constraints persist. • Two directives: 1.Preserve existing nuclear generation through coordinated regional action 2.Explore deployment of advanced nuclear in willing states and communities • Financing explicitly addressed. States will evaluate: – Innovative financing structures – Federal funding opportunities – Public-private partnerships – Regulatory frameworks to protect consumers • Siting approach is bottom-up. Emphasis on: – Community consent – Local decision-making – Addressing waste, safety, cost, and security concerns • Region already has nuclear ecosystem advantages: operating fleet, university R&D (fission + fusion), private investment, and naval nuclear presence. Bipartisan, multi-state alignment framing nuclear as essential to grid reliability, affordability, and future capacity expansion in New England. $CEG $VST $SMR $OKLO $BWXT $GEV $URA $URNM

The IPCC climate models are all wrong. They can't even replicate the AMO and PDO ocean thermal cycles. climatechangedispatch.com/ipcc-models-ov…

NEW: Boise mayor Lauren McLean appears to be on the verge of tears as she is forced to remove a Pride flag outside of City Hall. The LGBTQers then sang a sad song as the flag was lowered. The move comes after Governor Brad Little signed House Bill 561 into law, leading to the removal. Wonderful. Progress is being made. Video: pacey_speaks / tt.

Amidst the western U.S. heatwave, I plotted the average number of days per year during March at or above 80°F, 85°F, and 90°F from 1895 to 2025. There is not much of a long-term trend, maybe slightly upward. I may look at March days with maximum temperatures at or above the 90th percentile for better measure. But what's clear here is that this year's record-breaking heatwave (which is not plotted here) is almost entirely an artifact of natural variability and random chance.

Los filósofos Daniel Kodsi y John Maier sostienen que muchos de los fenómenos más absurdos y destructivos de nuestra época -desde la ideología de género, la cultura de la cancelación, el DEI, los encierros del COVID, el net zero, la abolición de la policía y prisiones, hasta la obsesión por “incluir” a toda costa- tienen una causa común: un vicio intelectual que ellos han llamado “excepcionalismo”. ¿Qué es el “excepcionalismo”? El excepcionalismo es la tendencia patológica a hacer demasiadas excepciones a reglas, principios y generalizaciones bien fundamentadas, basándose en casos aislados, anécdotas emocionales o deseos particulares. En lugar de mantener principios simples y sólidos, el excepcionalista complica excesivamente las ideas para acomodar cualquier anomalía, excepción o caso especial que le importe. Esto produce teorías sobre-complicadas, frágiles y a menudo absurdas. Los autores lo comparan con el problema científico conocido como “overfitting” (sobreajuste): cuando un modelo se ajusta tanto a los datos ruidosos o erróneos que pierde capacidad predictiva y se vuelve inútil. El excepcionalista cree que existen ciertas personas o cosas a las que las reglas normales no les aplican. Más aún, cuando se pone a reflexionar, a menudo llega a negar que esas reglas sean reglas en absoluto, justamente porque no contemplan las excepciones que él exige para sus categorías protegidas o especiales. Hay dos tipos de excepcionalistas: -El de mente única (single-minded): Se obsesionan con una sola causa o grupo protegido y subordinan todo lo demás a él (ejemplo: “minimizar muertes por Covid a cualquier costo”). -El Indiscriminado (Indiscriminate): Ven excepciones en todas partes y complican todo constantemente (típico de activistas woke, periodistas y gente “chronically online”). ¿Y qué ejemplos dan los autores de excepcionalismo o a qué lo aplican. Ahí van unos cuantos: -Ideología de género: Rechazar la definición biológica simple de “mujer” (hembra humana adulta) para acomodar casos raros o sentimientos subjetivos, creando teorías extremadamente complejas y contradictorias. -Encierros del Covid: Priorizar solo las muertes por coronavirus e ignorar todos los demás daños (salud mental, educación, economía, aislamiento de ancianos, etc.). -Cultura de la cancelación y restricciones a la libertad académica: La libertad de expresión se vuelve “sí, pero…” con infinitas excepciones para no ofender a ciertos grupos. -DEI y políticas de diversidad: Se sacrifican estándares meritocráticos y objetivos educativos para acomodar metas de “inclusión”. -Net Zero y políticas climáticas: Un objetivo único (cero emisiones) se impone aunque tenga costos desproporcionados en otros aspectos de la vida. -Abolicionismo policial y de prisiones: Ignorar que la mayoría de crímenes los cometen reincidentes y proponer soluciones complejas en lugar de la solución simple y efectiva. -Arte y cultura: Subordinar la calidad estética y el entretenimiento a objetivos políticos y de justicia social. En resumen, muchos disparates modernos (según estos dos filósofos) tienen una raíz común: en vez de mantener principios claros y generales, la gente se obsesiona con excepciones, anécdotas y casos especiales, complicando todo hasta volverlo absurdo. A esto los autores lo llaman “excepcionalismo” y lo ven como el verdadero problema intelectual de nuestra época.

So an interesting side note in this case. The woman who formally ran the Rosemead counseling center at Biola University filed an amicus brief in this case that took the same position as far left Justice Jackson. She didn’t want Christian counselors to be able to tell gender-confused kids that God fearfully and wonderfully made them male and female. She didn’t want Christian counselors to be able to help kids overcome their gender dysphoria and embrace their created identity. After I reported on this at @realDailyWire, she was removed from her position. This is the power of real journalism, investigating Christian institutions. It isn’t done to attack them, it’s to preserve them.