Climate Scientists Caught Tampering With Sea Level Data

Gulf of Aden

Climate Scientists Caught Tampering With Sea Level Data

A new research paper suggests scientists manipulated data to make it look like sea levels are rising faster than the raw data suggests.

The hypothesis of man-made global warming says that when humans burn fossil fuels, the resulting greenhouse gases insulate Earth to an unnatural extent. This allegedly causes the planet to warm, the polar ice caps to melt, and sea levels to rise.

While few people deny that the planet seems to be about a degree and a half warmer than it was a century ago, sea levels may not be rising as fast as many politicians say.

Australian scientists Dr. Albert Parker and Dr. Clifford Ollier produced a paper for Earth Systems and Environment, which was published online on November 6. Their paper—Is the Sea Level Stable at Aden, Yemen?exposes how officials at the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level(psmsl) appear to have manipulated tide gauge data to make it look like sea levels are rising faster than the raw data from Indian Ocean gauges suggest.

Parker and Ollier explain that collecting sea level data over long periods is difficult because scientists usually have to work with data sets taken over different time periods using different instruments. These data sets have to be spliced together to reveal a trend.

According to the raw data, sea levels in the Gulf of Aden rose by 1.89 millimeters per year between 1937 and 1969. But when psmsl officials spliced this data together with recently collected data, they lowered sea level data collected before 1969 to account for the use of different instruments. This makes it look like sea levels are rising by 3 millimeters per year.

Since the psmsl officials did not give an explanation for why they felt the old instrument collected data differently than the new instruments, Parker and Ollier were “suspicious” of their adjustments. “It is always highly questionable to shift data collected in the far past without any proven new supporting material,” they wrote in their report.

Other studies suggest that sea levels started gradually rising around the time that the “Little Ice Age” ended, around the start of the 19th century.

This was decades before the first smokestack of the Industrial Revolution went up. But because governments primarily fund scientists who conclude that more government regulations are necessary to save the planet, there is strong financial incentive for academics to conduct research indicating that private industry causes natural disasters.

“Academics who jump on the global warming bandwagon are far more likely to get big research grants than those who express doubts—and research is the lifeblood of an academic career at leading universities,” Dr. Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, wrote in his 2007 article “Global Warming Swindle.” “Environmental movements around the world are committed to global warming hysteria and nowhere more so than on college and university campuses, where they can harass those who say otherwise.”

Perhaps psmsl scientists are right and oceans are indeed rising by a rate of three millimeters per year. The burning of fossil fuels may have some limited effect on global temperatures and global sea levels. But those who believe the Bible should know that there is another reason for the catastrophic droughts, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes and fires we see all around us.

In Leviticus 26:3-4, God says, “If ye walk in my statutes, and keep my commandments, and do them; Then I will give you rain in due season, and the land shall yield her increase, and the trees of the field shall yield their fruit.” If weather disasters are destroying a nation, it is a sign that the nation is not walking in God’s statutes and keeping His commandments.

For a more detailed explanation of what the Bible says about climate change, read “Why the Trumpet Watches Increased ‘Natural’ and Weather Disasters.”

NEW2 - COVER - Jerusalem_Target.jpg

Iraq Is Conquered—On to Jerusalem

After 40 years of struggle, Iran has finally subdued Iraq. Now it sets its sights on the greater prize.

Read More

Unmasking Antifa

Julia Goddard/Trumpet

Unmasking Antifa

A group that promoted Communist dictatorship in Germany is now rising to prominence in the United States.
From the January 2018 Trumpet Print Edition

At least 100 demonstrators marched through the streets of Portland, Oregon, on November 4, chanting, “Whose streets? Our streets!” and “No kkk. No fascist U.S.A. No Trump.” Many of these demonstrators wore the logo of Antifa, the far-left movement that has been making headlines across Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. This demonstration was organized by Refuse Fascism pdx—a joint venture between the Revolutionary Communist Party usa and the Democratic Socialists of America. Its purpose, according to its organizers, was to call for the removal of “the Trump-Pence regime.”

This march was not marred by violence, but masked Antifa agitators caused nearly $100,000 worth of damage to the University of California–Berkeley campus last February during a protest against a speech by a Breitbart News editor. During those protests, Antifa members started fires, broke windows, painted graffiti on nearby businesses, destroyed automatic teller machines and assaulted bystanders.

Six months later, Antifa agitators announced their presence on August 12 by brawling with neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, Virginia. Then, they again made headlines for assaulting demonstrators at a “No to Marxism in America” rally on August 27.

As violent protests and demonstrations rise up across the country, many are now asking, “What is Antifa?”

Where ‘Anti-Fascism’ Began

Antifa is actually not a new political force. It is a loosely connected network of groups named in honor of the military wing of the Communist Party of Germany. The movement was founded in the 1920s as part of the Soviet Union’s efforts to transform Germany into a Communist dictatorship. The group’s name is an abbreviation for “anti-fascist,” and its strategy is to label all of its rival parties as “fascist.” During the 1920s and 1930s, Antifa worked to convince Germans that mainstream political parties like the Social Democrats were no better than the Nazis. This strategy successfully convinced hundreds of thousands of Germans to join the ranks of the Communist Party.

The Antifa movement experienced a resurgence in the 1980s, when far-left activists in Germany and the United States resurrected the strategy of labeling free-market advocates and constitutional conservatives as fascists. In the U.S., Antifa leaders specifically link the free market to white supremacy.

Mark Bray, an Antifa sympathizer and author of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, wrote in the Washington Post that Antifa activists “reject turning to the police or the state to halt the advance of white supremacy.” Instead, they advocate mob opposition to what they label as fascism, and resistance to free-market forces that they say support fascism. Popular Antifa chants include, “Cops and the Klan go hand in hand” and “No Trump. No wall. No U.S.A. at all.” That’s right: No U.S.A. at all.

By creating an environment where people lose faith in government institutions, Antifa hopes to swell its ranks, and the ranks of groups like Democratic Socialists of America. While it is difficult to pin down exact numbers on Antifa groups in the United States, an npr/pbs poll from August shows that up to 5 percent of the American public are sympathetic to Antifa’s cause. By polarizing the political scene into fascist and anti-fascist camps, Antifa is eroding the democratic center—like it did in 1920s Germany.

Where Lawlessness Is Leading

A dangerous trend toward lawlessness is taking root in America. Together with major media outlets and allied groups like Black Lives Matter, Antifa is promoting a narrative that America’s system of constitutional checks and balances is only a mask for wealthy, white European men to dominate. They say this system must be torn down.

There is a dark spiritual force behind the unrest. “Republicans and Democrats are divided like never before,” wrote editor in chief Gerald Flurry in the October 2017 Philadelphia Trumpet. “Rather than trying to solve the nation’s problems, the radical left is stirring them up. Some people believe they are bringing down President Donald Trump, but are they instead bringing down America itself?”

The Bible prophesies this about America’s near future: “Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers” (Isaiah 1:7). Why would God allow such devastation? Because Americans have rebelled against His law.

In a companion prophecy in Ezekiel 5, God reveals that there will be a time of violent rioting in the cities of America (as well as Britain) just before they suffer a foreign invasion. The dangerous level of ideological division in modern-day America is leading to the ultimate fulfillment of this prophecy.

The extent to which Antifa will specifically contribute to the unfolding of this nightmarish scenario remains to be seen. But its openly subversive aims and its revolution-oriented violence are beginning to gather dangerous momentum in American society. Expect it to grow far worse.

Exodus - iStock-117144931.jpg

Plagues of Egypt: Proved?

A document describing Egypt’s sudden downfall is suspiciously similar to the Exodus account.

Read More

Did You Know Google Redefined the Word ‘Fascism’?

Did You Know Google Redefined the Word ‘Fascism’?

The partiality of news sources is becoming a serious problem.

The world’s most powerful search engine made a subtle change to its online dictionary last year. Watchdog journalists News Busters exposed this change back in February. Their article revealed how Google altered its definition of the word “fascism” during the 2016 United States presidential election campaign. Tom Blumer of News Busters wrote on February 6, “Google’s current dictionary definition of ‘fascism’ returned in searches on that word now limits its application exclusively to ‘right-wing’ governmental systems and views.”

This change sits in stark contrast to the historically accepted meaning of the word.

Arguments about the definition of fascism have existed for almost as long as fascism itself. “The word fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable,’” George Orwell famously lamented in 1946. But this change from Google came even as accusations of fascism are being hurled increasingly often.

Merriam-Webster defines fascism as “a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.”

Take note of its mention of “severe economic and social regimentation.” This definition is describing a socialist form of government normally associated with the political left.

In stark contrast, here is a screenshot of the definition that showed up earlier this year after performing a Google search on the word “fascism.”

Notice there is no reference to “economic and social regimentation” and fascism is described as an exclusively “right-wing system of government.” Before May 2016, Google was allegedly using the definition of fascism, which makes no mention of “right-wing” politics and draws attention to fascism’s need to regiment all industry and commerce.

Since this change was discovered, Google has changed its definition of fascism back to a version closer to what is commonly accepted. But the question remains: Why did it make the change in the first place?

“The limited available evidence indicates that the search behemoth [Google] changed its definition last year just before Donald Trump clinched the Republican Party’s presidential nomination, and that the website has been directly associating Trump with fascism in its search results for well over a year,” Blumer wrote.

The push to change the definition of a fascist in the minds of the American public is not new. Radical activists like Antifa have been using this technique of thought manipulation for decades. Trumpet writer Andrew Miiller spoke on this subject in “What You Need to Know About Antifa.”

“The movement was founded in the 1920s as part of the Soviet Union’s efforts to transform Germany into a Communist dictatorship,” Miiller wrote. “By labeling all rival parties as ‘fascist,’ Antifa hoped to convince Germans that the nation’s mainstream political parties in the 1920s and 1930s were no better than the Nazis. This strategy convinced millions of Germans to join the ranks of the Communist Party.”

The very same strategy is being used today. In order to draw support for their cause, the socialists are labeling free-market advocates and libertarians as fascists. Their goal is to associate Donald Trump with Hitler, and the Republican Party with the fascist Nazi regime.

According to fascism’s definition, Republicans share no similarities with the fascists of 1930s Germany. Fascism is a system based on strict government control of economy and society. The Republican Party is an advocate of a small, constitutionally limited federal government.

And thus, the pursuit of an altered definition of fascism led to changes in information sources like Google.

Throughout the battle for the White House, and during the first few months of Mr. Trump’s presidency, this tactic has been successful. “You see it on signs at every protest or riot,” political strategist Derek Hunter wrote. “Liberals accuse President Donald Trump of being a fascist. The word’s association with Adolf Hitler and its use now is no accident; it’s meant to strike fear in people’s hearts of tyranny.”

The irony is that with their violent suppression of free speech and unambiguous prejudice against free markets, the radical left is exhibiting behavior much closer to the true definition of fascism than its enemies.

Truth and impartiality are in short supply in American politics these days.

A prime example of this one-sided journalism is John McNeill’s opinion piece titled “How Fascist Is Donald Trump? There’s Actually a Formula for That.” This “news” article follows a list of traits that supposedly define fascism. The author rated President Trump upon these qualities, giving him 0-4 “Benitos” (points named after fascist dictator Benito Mussolini) for how closely he seems to follow these “fascist factors.” The premise comes out of nowhere and is completely opinion based.

There are many more examples of bias in the media today. For a greater understanding of the extent of this problem, read Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry’s article “Where Media Bias Is Leading Us.”

This loss of impartiality in supposedly impartial news sources is a disturbing trend. The power that Google, a massive Internet company, holds is phenomenal. Such control over information has not been seen in the Western world since the actual fascists were defeated in 1945. According to Business Insider, there are over 2.3 million Google searches per minute. “People rely on Google’s services so heavily that when they all went down for five minutes in 2013, global Internet traffic dropped by 40 percent.”

By becoming partisan, Google has the power to alter the political perceptions of hundreds of millions of people.

When the truth is pushed to the side and when lies become common fare, serious trouble is sure to follow. Consider the wisdom contained in the book of Proverbs: “A man who bears false witness against his neighbor is like a war club, or a sword, or a sharp arrow” (Proverbs 25:18). Knowingly spreading a lie in order to discredit or bring someone down will only lead to violent reactions. And that is what is bound to happen to America. Very soon, the hatred against Republicans will no longer be confined to protests and search engine definitions.

“The press repeatedly discusses their passion for seeking the truth,” Mr. Flurry wrote. “Too often that is shamefully untrue. Only the truth can set us free (John 8:32). How often we discuss freedom in this land. But are we so enslaved to arrogance and self-importance that we don’t even know what freedom is. … The nation of ancient Israel fell. Just before they collapsed, ‘every man did that which was right in his own eyes’ (Judges 21:25). They didn’t trust anybody but themselves. They made the same mistakes we are making today—and the nation fell!”

190430-Army helecipter-iStock-488391662.jpg

Former Defense Official: Military Revolution to Unseat U.S. Superpower

The U.S. military will soon be facing a defeat far worse than the French suffered at Agincourt.

Read More

Presidents and Their TV Preferences


Presidents and Their TV Preferences

Listen to the Dec. 11, 2017, episode of the Trumpet Daily Radio Show.

Yesterday, the New York Times printed an unflattering, 4,300-word profile of U.S. President Donald Trump’s love for cable news television, tweeting and dessert. The Times insists that this president only has the attention span of a “jackrabbit.” So he’s forced to rely mainly on verbal meetings and Fox News to get most of his information. Of course, when Barack Obama watched television—and he watched a lot—it was always a much-needed break from a long, grueling day at the Oval Office. Trump does it because he’s shallow. That’s how the Times sees it. On today’s program, we look at the tv-viewing preferences of the past two U.S. presidents—as well as the other important stories of the day.

Listen on Stitcher

Download the show on iTunes

Catch up with the latest programs here

190403-Kansas flood-GettyImages-1137670449.jpg

Midwest Floods: Worst Agricultural Disaster in Modern U.S. History

Catastrophic flooding swamped America’s breadbasket. The effects could last years.

Read More

CSU Power Struggle: Time for Guttenberg?

Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg behind CSU leader Horst Seehofer
Miguel Villagran/Getty Images

CSU Power Struggle: Time for Guttenberg?

Almost more interesting than the power struggle in Berlin is the power struggle in Germany’s most powerful and unique state: Bavaria. Who will be Bavaria’s next king?

Germany’s political earthquake hit the state of Bavaria on December 4 when long-time premier Horst Seehofer announced he would step down next year. He will be replaced by one of his biggest rivals: Markus Söder. But Seehofer said that he intended to maintain leadership of the Christian Social Union (csu). This means Söder’s appointment as state premier does not end the power struggle in the csu—it merely marks a “new chapter” as Süddeutsche Zeitung noted (Trumpet translation throughout).

Of Germany’s 16 states, Bavaria is the only one ruled by the conservative csu. Despite this, the csu has been able to hold, together with its coalition partner, the Christian Democratic Union, a majority in the federal parliament for decades. The csu has ruled Bavaria on its own since 1966, except between 2008–2013 when it had to form a coalition. Other state governments have had to create multiple unstable coalitions.

But the September election revealed a vulnerability in the csu’s majority in Bavaria. The csu stronghold is under threat, and it desperately needs a savior.

The party received less than 40 percent of the vote on election day—a historic low. What might have seemed like a great result for almost any other party is a disaster for the csu. Furthermore, Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) was successful in Bavaria, receiving a double-digit share of the vote for the first time. Bavaria’s ability to form a majority government and to prevent the rise of another right-wing party is in jeopardy. State elections will be held in the fall of 2018. Receiving only 40 percent of the vote in the elections in Bavaria would be unacceptable, so the csu is frantically seeking new leadership.

The csu experienced its glory days under the rule of the late Franz Josef Strauss. He became chairman of the csu in 1961, and Bavarian premier in 1978. He ruled both until his death in 1988. Strauss is still celebrated as the icon of the csu, and few have managed to fill his shoes. In 1980, the union party between the csu and the Christian Democratic Union (cdu) chose him as their candidate for the chancellor. This was a first for a csu leader; Edmund Stoiber is the only other csu leader to have received this honor.

Strauss’s death started a series of power struggles over the csu leadership that turned the party into a spectacle for the German media. The state leader is a celebrity beyond Bavaria’s borders—so much so that many people in other states are more familiar with the Bavarian premier than those in their own states. The media even calls the Bavarian state premier “Bavaria’s king.”

Today, the csu leadership is far from stable as the party is divided into factions.

The late Herbert W. Armstrong believed that a strongman like Franz Josef Strauss had the potential to rally behind him not only Bavaria but all of Europe. The csu dreams of another king like Strauss. Europe needs the leadership such a strongman can provide. The question is, Will Söder qualify as Bavaria’s next king?

The turmoil in the party, along with the people’s discontent, were too strong for Seehofer. But no one candidate is qualified to take on both of his responsibilities. Bavaria’s leadership is again to be divided into two heads: Seehofer will continue as csu chairman while Söder governs as state premier.

Bavaria has fallen into the undesirable situation of a split in leadership. Historically, such a situation has never been a success and only lasts as an unstable transition period.

Not only is this split in leadership undesirable, but Söder is seen as merely the last resort. Though he has many supporters, his critics are even more vociferous than Seehofer’s and even most of the media question his qualifications. Söder is viewed as a divider who used controversy to his advantage. Now the divider is being called on to unify the csu during one of its greatest crises.

Süddeutsche Zeitung highly doubts his qualifications, calling it a “tragedy that deals with the emaciating and failure of a party.” Furthermore, it suspects that “Söder’s nomination did not end the war in the csu but only marked the beginning of a new chapter.”

Not only was Seehofer unable to keep the csu majority and prevent the rise of the AfD, he also could not prevent the rise of rivals to his Bavarian throne. But Seehofer still has a few cards to play before the power struggle is over. Söder now faces the quadruple challenge of sharing leadership with his rival, trying to unite a torn party, pleasing an upset electorate, and suppressing the vultures that await his failure. Seehofer does not want to hand over the party leadership yet. csu honorary chairman Stoiber admonished Seehofer to not leave the field at halftime: “The game is not over yet.”

The reason Seehofer keeps fighting goes beyond just delaying Söder’s rise. Spiegel Online has speculated that Seehofer is holding on to his office to reserve it for yet another rising player: Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg. Before Guttenberg’s resignation in 2011 due to a plagiarism scandal, he was seen as the csu’s greatest hope. Seehofer and other csu leaders, like Stoiber, have not lost that hope. They continue to plan this charismatic leader’s return.

On April 24, Spiegel Online asked: Why does Seehofer hold on to his power? Is it just to keep Söder out as long as he can? The answer is:

No. Those who know Seehofer, suspect that he could pursue another plan. A plan that should keep Söder not only down for some time, but possibly permanently. The plan could go like this: Gain time and hope for Mr. Right. Hope for Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg.

If former defense minister Guttenberg would return from his U.S. exile to Germany and demand the leadership of his party, he would win it in no time.

This is not unfounded speculation. All in Germany know that Guttenberg is the one Seehofer wants as his successor. In the weeks leading up to the September federal elections, we saw more support for Spiegel’s observation. Upon Seehofer’s request, Guttenberg reentered the Bavarian stage with great success. People were so captivated by his speeches that he garnered more attention than even Chancellor Angela Merkel or any of her rivals. Some even exclaimed that he spoke like Franz Josef Strauss. There couldn’t be a greater honor conferred on a csu politician than to receive such a compliment.

Despite all the attention and praise, Guttenberg still rejected invitations to take over the party leadership. Even though he has the best qualifications, he’s also the most reserved about his aspirations. Many think his silence means he has no desire to rule. But notice what Bild said about a key to ruling in Bavaria: “For the Christian Social Union, the 11th commandment (some say the first) is: Do not openly voice your power ambitions unless you are sure of your majority.”

Guttenberg has obeyed this commandment perfectly—so much so that even many in his own party have lost hope of his return. But Guttenberg could be playing a perfect game of deception, waiting for the perfect moment for a comeback—a time when the crises become unbearable and his leadership is most desired.

Guttenberg is wise to wait. Other candidates for the leadership remain, who will quit the race when they fail to rise to the challenge. Sooner or later, it will be obvious that the leadership vacuum both in Bavaria and in Berlin will exceed the qualifications of the current leaders. The time is quickly approaching when Germany will cry out for a strongman.

In A Strong German Leader Is Imminent,Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry writes:

Daniel 11:21 prophesies that this strong leader will come into power “by flatteries”—probably not by votes, but through a coalition government of some kind. We need to watch Germany and Europe carefully. Although Bible prophecy gives us the outline of how it will unfold, we don’t know the details.

Starting as Bavaria’s king, Guttenberg might seize the chance to eventually rule all of Europe. Prophecy is clear that Germany will get its strongman, and the paths to this outcome are becoming clear. If nothing else, the power struggle in Bavaria is worth watching. Request our free booklet A Strong German Leader Is Imminent to learn where a German strongman will lead Europe and the world.

NEW - Refugees-875287558_KevinFrayer Getty.jpg

Learn the Lesson of the ‘Great Multitude’

It could protect you from a world of suffering.

Read More

This Week: Five Events You Need to Know (December 10)


This Week: Five Events You Need to Know (December 10)

U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, North Korean collusion with Russia, China and Iran, and more

Here are five of the most important news stories this week, as well as relevant links to the full articles and videos here on

Jerusalem and Donald Trump’s Entirely Unremarkable Declaration

On December 6, United States President Donald Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and pledged to move America’s embassy to Jerusalem. This announcement plunged the civilized world into convulsions and mass hysteria.

America’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel will undoubtedly have significant geopolitical ramifications and, depending on how the Palestinians and international community respond, might be a game changer. But not because the truth at the heart of this announcement was erroneous, unreasonable or provocative. In fact, the truth at the heart of this announcement is rational, logical and entirely unremarkable.

North Korea Getting Nuclear Weapons Help From Russia, China, Iran

North Korea’s rapid progress in developing nuclear weapons is likely thanks to help from Russia, China and Iran, according to retired Adm. James Stavridis, a former supreme allied commander for nato.

“[T]he idea that [North Korean leader Kim Jong-un] would simply be developing this on an indigenous basis within his own population of scientists simply seems unlikely given how fast it’s moving. … You’ve got to think that at least part of it is coming from either China or Russia.”

Russian Orthodox Patriarch Warns of End-time Apocalypse

After a November 20 service at Moscow’s Christ the Savior Cathedral, Patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church warned that mankind is approaching the end of history. “One must be blind not to see the approach of the terrible moments of history about which the apostle and evangelist John the theologian spoke in his Revelation,” he said.

Some Russian strategists and politicians believe that Russia is waging a “holy war” against the forces of the antichrist in an apocalyptic struggle. Russian President Vladimir Putin, they say, is their Eastern Orthodox czar.

Read Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry’s booklet The Prophesied ‘Prince of Russia’, to learn what the Bible says about Russia’s strongman.

American-German Relations ‘Crumble’

Speaking to an audience of politicians and government representatives at the Koerber Foundation on December 5, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said that relations between Europe and the United States were beginning to “crumble.” He pointed to America’s withdrawal from the world stage as a contributing factor. “Germany cannot afford to wait for decisions in Washington or to just react,” he said. “We have to describe our own positions and if necessary also make clear to our allies when the limits of our solidarity are reached.”

These are shockingly strong words for a nation that has comfortably sat back for years as America took the lead.

Sinai Violence Threatens Egypt’s President

According to the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, the Sinai Peninsula region has suffered 1,700 terrorist attacks over the last four years. This despite the efforts of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has initiated military crackdowns. Should the president fail in his attempts to stabilize the Sinai, radical Islam will effect radical change in Egypt.

“This Week” appears every Sunday. To get these same top stories in your inbox ahead of time every Friday afternoon, subscribe to the Trumpet Brief daily e-mail. Sign up by clicking here or by visiting home page.