'He supposedly got shot in the ear'

'They weren’t looking for them'

President Donald Trump seeks to restore America’s “gold standard science”—a science that’s rooted in transparency, peer review, reproducibility, and freedom from political pressure. It’s time to apply that sort of science to climate. “[W]here any type of ‘scientific evidence’ is used to support a government policy, a regulation, or legislation, the science behind it should … adhere to the elements outlined in President Trump’s May 23 Executive Order,” wrote environmental health expert Warren Kindzierski and statistician Stanley Young, a fellow of the American Statistical Association. There’s no area that needs this more than that of the climate. Climate policy has often relied on research that warrants stronger scrutiny and more rigorous validation. Agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency sometimes rely on projections and models that cannot be tested or reproduced to justify sweeping regulations that affect everything from energy production to air quality standards. Cooling the Climate Hysteria, edited by Kevin Dayaratna, dissects such unscientific projections. In a chapter written by Young and Kindzierski, they highlight the falsified link often drawn between climate change, ground-level ozone, and asthma. According to Young and Kindzierski, ozone concentrations have declined significantly in recent decades, even as asthma rates have remained stable or increased. Thus, they conclude that the correlation between asthma and ozone concentrations is weak, if a correlation even exists at all. But Young and Kindzierski highlight major inconsistencies in the EPA’s supporting evidence, an issue as important as the findings themselves. They write, “academic researchers today are rewarded in the university setting … for publishing research; but not for publishing ‘reproducible’ research.” Specifically, they point to the EPA’s reliance on statistical associations of variables without the establishment of any plausible biological mechanisms. For example, its research simply identified a correlation between ozone levels and asthma outcomes, but didn’t account for other potentially significant variables like allergens, indoor air, quality, or socioeconomic factors. When making statistical interpretations, it’s vitally important to establish biological plausibility. Without it, studies can mistake correlation for causation. Ignoring confounding variables can lead to an overstatement of health risks—and if such studies are used as the basis for regulation, the end result is regulatory action that imposes large economic costs for minimal or no actual health benefit. Young and Kindzierski identify concerning discrepancies within EPA models. Many studies use proprietary or unpublished data, making it impossible for independent researchers to confirm the results under the same conditions. This lack of transparency prevents researchers from confirming that the EPA’s models are reproducible—a critical characteristic of the scientific method. The EPA’s models also exhibit signs of multiple testing bias. The report found that for studies on the onset of asthma, the median number of possible hypotheses tested was about 13,824. Assuming the tests were run at the 5 percent significance level and using the median number of hypotheses, the number of false positives (statistically significant results purely due to chance) would be approximately 691. This means the EPA’s studies could contain hundreds of false positives, results that may be nothing more than mathematical noise mistaken for meaningful science. Without correcting for this statistical bias, these findings aren’t worthy of being considered in policy creation. Environmental studies display one of the highest levels of effect size inflation in modern scientific journals. A 2023 meta-analysis found that nearly 30 percent of the “effects” reported in environmental science meta-analyses may be artifacts of selective publication, or publication bias. That’s the phenomenon in which studies that produce positive or dramatic results are more frequently published, while studies with negative or inconclusive findings are often ignored or withheld. This creates a distorted picture of reality in which only “headline-worthy” science makes it into the literature, regardless of its accuracy. This pattern feeds into the very problem the new executive order aims to fix. Policies based on inflated risks and non-reproducible studies have consequences that are felt by everyone in the U.S. Research used to shape energy policy needs a low margin for error and a higher standard of proof. Young and Kindzierski’s analysis highlighted the discrepancies within current federal research, but their work also points to something deeper: a need for humility in science and restraint in policymaking. When science is used to justify sweeping authority, it must answer to more than the narrative—it must answer to the truth. The future of climate policy should depend not on louder claims but instead on sound evidence. The post The Climate Narrative Needs a Gold Standard Audit appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The House of Representatives approved a bill this week enshrining the name of a wildlife preserve to memorialize a young Texas girl killed more than a year ago, allegedly by a pair of illegal aliens.  Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who sponsored the legislation in the Senate, told The Daily Signal, “Jocelyn Nungaray was a 12-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted and murdered just north of Houston. The bill will codify President Trump’s executive order and permanently rename the Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge in Texas in her memory,” adding: We will never forget this young Texan, and this will ensure her legacy lives on forever. The Jocelyn Nungaray National Wildlife Refuge Act is now headed to President Donald Trump’s desk after passing both chambers of Congress. The legislation codifies into federal law the changing of the name of the wildlife refuge in Anahuac, Texas, to the Jocelyn Nungaray National Wildlife Refuge. The two illegal aliens charged with killing Nungaray on June 16, 2024, are said to be members of the Tren de Aragua gang, a brutal Venezuelan criminal organization that has been designated a foreign terrorist organization under Trump.  Johan Jose Martinez-Rangel, 23, and Franklin Jose Peña Ramos, 27, have been charged with capital murder. The wildlife refuge was renamed through an executive order by Trump in March to honor Nungaray. Trump told Nungaray’s mother during his address to a joint session of Congress in March that he “promised that we would always remember your daughter, your magnificent daughter.”  “She loved animals and had a passion for ensuring that they had homes. It is fitting and in the national interest, therefore, that the Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge, a scenic area for coastal wildlife and recreation along the Gulf of America near Jocelyn’s home in Texas, will forever honor and preserve the memory of a beautiful American, Jocelyn Nungaray,” the White House said in a March 5 statement. The legislation that now goes to the president’s desk to be signed would prevent a future president from changing the name back through another executive order. The refuge, established in 1963 and comprising about 39,000 acres, is a sanctuary for wildlife, including migratory birds. It is run by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and used for conservation, public recreation, and education about the environment. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, a cosponsor of the legislation, said in a statement: “We have a duty to honor [Nungaray’s] memory, and to bear witness alongside her family. I applaud my colleagues in the House for passing this, which codifies President Trump’s order renaming the Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge as the Jocelyn Nungaray National Wildlife Refuge, and I look forward to President Trump signing it into law.” Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, who sponsored the legislation in the House, explained that the “refuge will forever honor her bright spirit, her love for animals, and the beautiful life she should have been able to live. It also stands as a solemn reminder of the devastating cost of an open border—and our responsibility to prevent this kind of tragedy from ever happening again.” The post Congress Enshrines New Name for Wildlife Refuge to Honor Slain Texas Girl appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It's the End of Regime Comedy As We Know It, and I Feel Fine

It's Not Just Strategic U.S. Land China Is Trying To Buy, They're Buying Judges, Too

CNN host Harry Enten warned Democrats this week they could trail Republicans by the largest margins in decades if they do not turn things around.Enten, the resident stats expert at CNN, told Democrats to "hold the phone" if they think criticizing the Trump administration over the Jeffrey Epstein files is going to save them.Instead, Trump's support has been resilient among likely voters, with the Democrats in danger of taking a monumental backstep in the 2026 midterm elections.'Democrats have not come anywhere close to sealing the deal at this particular point.'Enten delivered the shocking numbers to CNN's John Berman, giving him the grim "bottom line" for the Democrats."Democrats are behind their 2006 and 2018 paces when it comes to the generic congressional ballot."In Democrat versus Republican congressional ballot margins, the Democrat lead has shrunk by more than two times when compared to July 2005, when it was a +7-point margin. The gap remained the same in 2017, but in July 2025, the margin is now just a +2 for Democrats."Donald Trump may be unpopular, but Democrats have not come anywhere close to sealing the deal at this particular point," Enten told his colleague.The devastating numbers somehow got way worse for Democrats when breaking down the midterms race by race.RELATED: Election officials rage as Trump administration pushes for election security When comparing chances for seat changes ahead of previous midterms under Republican presidents, Democrats were favored by +7 in 2005 and a whopping +33 in 2017, CNN showed.The Democrats over performed in both cases, picking up 31 seats in the 2006 midterms and 41 seats in the 2018 midterms.Now, CNN's Enten showed Republicans are up a shocking 12 points at the same time this year ahead of the 2026 midterms."So it's not just on the generic ballot where Democrats are behind their 2017 and 2005 pace. It's actually when it comes seat by seat, you see that at least at this particular point, Republicans actually have more net pick-up opportunities," Enten stressed."This doesn't look anything like those wave elections back in 2006 or 2018," he added.RELATED: When I brought the truth to Congress, Democrats lost their mindsReality check: Dems are way behind their 2006 & 2018 pace on the generic ballot at this point in the cycle.Ahead by only 2 pt vs. 7 pt in 2006/2018 cycles.Seat-by-seat analysis actually reveals more GOP pickup opportunities than Dems! Very much unlike 2006 & 2018 at this pt. pic.twitter.com/CRgXukTjz6— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) July 16, 2025The stat guru concluded by showing the congressional ballot margin numbers were the same among voters in October 2024, before the presidential election, as they are now. "Reality check," Enten wrote on his X account. "Dems are way behind their 2006 & 2018 pace ... at this point in the cycle."The host emphasized that the numbers he is seeing are indicative of when Republicans have held onto a House majority and appear strikingly similar to the 2024 election cycle.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

I Wanna Be a Teen Again spans more than 75 tracks featuring such artists as the Bangles, Marshall Crenshaw, Dwight Twilley, and Katrina and the Waves. The post American Power Pop 1980-1989 3-CD Collection is Released appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

SHOCKER: Yet ANOTHER Top Biden Official Pleads the Fifth in Probe About Joe's Mental Decline (Watch)

MSNBC's Chris Hayes Says the Colbert Cancellation Means America Has Failed the Test of a Free Society