Strange: Uber – Warmist California Residents Aren’t Cutting Back On Water Usage

Hence, all these Cult of Climastrology members must be forced by Government

(USA Today) California’s state water board on Tuesday approved emergency drought regulations that aim to slash water use in urban areas by 25%.

The measures call for cities and water agencies to reduce water usage by amounts ranging from 8% to 36%. The State Water Resources Control Board drew up the rules to meet Gov. Jerry Brown’s order for a 25% cut in urban water use statewide. (Snip)

According to the latest figures released by the board, Californians reduced water use by just 3.6% in March as compared to the same month in 2013. That was a slight change from a 2.8% reduction in February, and significantly less than a 22% drop in December and a 7.3% reduction in January.

Max Gomberg, a senior environmental scientist with the state water board, called the new mandatory measures a “desperate times approach.”

Well, that’s strange. Warmists in California simply blew off the call to reduce their water usage. I guess they figure they Did Their Part in December, and now Other People should have to suffer.

I wonder if the very liberal folks living in McMansions, working in Hollywood, and tech companies will reduce their water usage?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “Strange: Uber – Warmist California Residents Aren’t Cutting Back On Water Usage”

  1. Liam Thomas says:

    On average, the United States experiences 100,000 thunderstorms each year, resulting in more than 1,200 tornadoes and approximately 50 deaths per year.

    1960….616 tornadoes that killed 48 people.

    From 1970-1985 the average number of tornadoes was between 600-1100 per year in the USA.

    2012….938 tornadoes that killed 70 people.
    2013….907 tornadoes that killed 57 people.
    2014….888 tornadoes that killed 47 people.

    The reason that more tornadoes are being reported is because of the massive coverage of instant communications as well as the internet and……

    The growing “hobby” of tornado chasing has also contributed to the increasing number of reported tornadoes.

    In short the number of tornadoes has not significantly increased but what has increased is the reporting of said tornados while the death tolls remain relatively even…..even as the rural population continues to expand.

  2. john says:

    Uh Ha a doubting Thomas, Has the number of class 4-5 tornadoes increased?
    Has the number of deaths decreased because of instant communications?

  3. JGlanton says:

    Has the number of class 4-5 tornadoes increased?

    F3-F5 through 2012:
    http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/images/tornado/clim/EF3-EF5.png

    “In short the number of tornadoes has not significantly increased but what has increased is the reporting of said tornados”

    Which is why the NOAA reports “inflation-adjusted” tornado counts. I’m not sure if their methodology is sound, but they attempt to get rid of reporting inflation. 2015, for example:
    http://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/torgraph-big.png

  4. JGlanton says:

    In other climate trends, if you like more ice there is good news: Global sea ice area is now the second highest on record for May and higher than it was 20 years ago. Yay, ice!

  5. john says:

    Actually it isn’t so “strange” that people act in what they perceive to be their own short term interests
    You Teach recognize that ISIS is a threat, but your own self interests stop you from volunteering to fight them, let someone else do it. Well it is the same in CA. Everyone wants others to do it, which is why we have BIG GOVERNMENT that will enforce changes in peoples behavior.

  6. Jeffery says:

    Global sea ice area is now the second highest on record for May and higher than it was 20 years ago.

    Could you please supply the citation? Thanks.

  7. Jeffery says:

    Warmists in California simply blew off the call to reduce their water usage.

    How do you know that only climate realists (whom you slur as warmists) did not cut water usage enough?

    Maybe those Hollywood conservatives like Clint Eastwood, Angie Harmon, James Woods, Kelsey Grammer, Chuck Norris, Sylvester Stallone, Tony Danza, John Voight, Bruce Willis, Kevin Sorbo, Tom Selleck, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Kurt Russell, Ben Stein, Pat Sajak, Mel Gibson, Drew Carey, Stephen Baldwin, Craig T. Nelson, Gary Oldman, Jim Caveizel, Vince Vaughn, Robert Downey, Jr., Robert Duvall, Andy Garcia, Adam Sandler, Dean Cain, The Rock, Gary Sinise, Dennis Miller and on and on… didn’t turn down their spigots either.

    Do you really think that only people who understand the climate system live in California?

    How about the corporations that own almond groves, vineyards, huge ranches and farms? Or do you really only think that ordinary citizens are to blame?

  8. jl says:

    John-“Has the number of class 4-5 tornadoes increased?” If they have, what would it prove?

  9. Liam Thomas says:

    I am no doubter that the earth is getting warmer and that climate is changing.

    However their are more important things to address then climate change in this world.

    How about massive sugar use which has fueled heart disease and Diabetes on a scale approaching pandemic status?

    The continual reengineering of seeds to resist many different things resulting in the increased uses of Pesticides and fertilizers which are growing stronger by the decade?

    It is commonly believed that the Mayans left their cities because of a massive and extended drought. Im pretty sure that their exhalation of co2 was no doubt the cause.

    But lets address the need for more and more and more food to feed more and more and more people.

    Oh wait…..we all know that the real reason Climate change aka global warming aka global cooling aka the weather sucks……..is nothing more then a means to halt population growth…..

    So I ask you a simple question. Lets end carbon based fuels today. Carbon base petroleum products. Today.

    Please give me a solution to what exactly is going to propel a billion trucks, planes, ships, trains and T R A C T O R S in an effort to feed the peoples of the world.

    Windmills? Hydro electric damns? Solar Panels? Nuclear power plants? Are all of these going to propel the above mentioned items that FEED the WORLD?

    Chirp….chirp….chirp………of course not because we all know the real intent of the Climate change Nazis is the ending of population growth and in fact its why the left did nothing when genocide was rampant in Africa…..and why Obama does nothing now when people are killing people by the boatloads around the globe.

    The leftist climatenazis are more afraid of the future then any right climate denier. While we work to solve the worlds problems, protest and demand that the poor nations of the world be fed….the climate nazis scream……..To hell with you all….Plug the holes in the ground and STARVE…..

    Climate Nazis make Conservatives look like saints……which of course we are because in the end we want the people to eat…even if the planet is 1 degree warmer and the ocean is 3 inches higher then it was 200 years ago……..

  10. Liam Thomas says:

    I only really have one thing to say to the idiots who are weather nazis.

    Matter can be neither created nor destroyed. The CO2 that is present on this planet is what we have. We can produce no more then what this planet holds.

    The earth scrubs it, stores it and then the cycle starts all over again. Manmade CO2 is a figment of the climate nazis wet dream in ending population growth.

    1 billion years ago we had xxx amount of co2 on this planet…….today we have that exact same amount of xxx co2. Nothing has changed other then where the co2 currently exists. The earth is constantly working to store, seal and secure co2.

    Why? Because the predominant life form of this planet uses Not Oxygen but CO2 and are you ready? it uses Nitrogen. 80 percent of our air is nitrogen and mankind does not even need nor use nitrogen. In fact put us in a room with nothing but nitrogen and co2 and we die.

    PLANT LIFE uses CO2 and nitrogen. This planet was made for plant based life…not carbon based life. We are a fungus a parasite and blight on the planet….and try as we might the only thing we can do to this planet is make it healthier for the predominant species….PLANTS…….then we can harm it.

    How you like them apples. Oh yeah….another plant based species that uses CO2 and nitrogen to exist.

  11. Jeffery says:

    The planet was made for plant based life?

    The planet tries to expunge animal life?

    Humans are a fungus?

    Your take on the carbon is partly correct, though, but you’re not educating any climate realists about that topic. Humans are converting long chain and cyclic carbon (locked up in oil, gas and coal) into carbon dioxide, which you rightly recognize as a gas – a gas that is causing the planet to warm rapidly.

    But your “idea” that green plants are orchestrating the overthrow of this human fungus is magic.

    The idea that you and your family will be largely unaffected by global warming is as selfish and irrelevant as it is true. Fuck the future; you got yours now.

    Yes, green plants use sunlight to convert gaseous CO2 into long chain molecules which no longer cause the Earth to warm. Yes, by the time the Earth has warmed some 8C and large swaths are uninhabitable by humans, green plants will start to dominate the landscape, much as in the early Devonian (some 400 million years ago – 400,000,000 years!). Over the following few 10s of millions of years the dominant plants caused the CO2 to drop and the Earth to cool! Your theory says that we need do nothing – since the Earth will self correct once we drive the global temperature to the point where the ice sheets are melted and human populations are huddled in what is now Canada and Siberia. History shows us that that self correction will only take 30 or 40 million years!!

    You’re probably correct that climate realists (whom you slur as Nazis – really? Nazis? Who killed millions? – fuck you) are being selfish, valuing our species over ferns and cacti and algae that will dominate your hot new world. No apologies. You value only what you can consume in your lifetime and how plants will grow and a couple thousand of years. I think about my great-great-great grandchildren and others a thousand years.

    Let’s recap:

    You think of Earth as “Gaia”, a magical, sentient being.

    You’re proposing that we burn all the fossil fuels on Earth which would warm the Earth a whopping 15 degrees C. This will take a thousand years or less. A long time for humans, but a mere speck for the Earth.

    Then we wait 30 or 40 million years for the Earth to cool.

    Good plan. Fuck you for calling others Nazis. You’re what a dumb guy thinks a smart guy sounds like.

  12. Liam Thomas says:

    Ahh Jeffrey. Your true anger becomes apparent when you seriously have no rebuttal for evolutions truth.

    You do believe in evolution right? Plant life has been here long before mankind and will be here long after mankind has killed itself off.

    You should open your eyes and do a bit of research on the subject. 40 million years ago the planet was a greenhouse and the measurable co2 was over 4000 PPM.

    During that time only 40 percent of the Ice Sheet in Greenland melted. During that time Ice core samples of Antarctica showed that only about 31 percent shrinkage of the ice shelf occurred.

    The planet thrived. Long before man plants thrived and existed and were nurtured by the oceans and the falling rain and massive amounts of nitrogen and co2.

    And now in your great wisdom and intelligence mankind must save the planet by……..not burning fossil fuels.

    Okay…..super……in your grand intelligent plan…just how do we feed everyone with nothing to farm the land with…..are we to use oxen farting methane? I want insult your intelligence with the fact methane is 100x worse for climate change then co2.

    How do we feed the masses? HOW do we GET US SOME if their is no longer any fuel to fuel anything that is needed to efficiently farm the land?

    Face it Kevin in your anger you only want people to die off. You do not want to save the planet. You want people to die off so that you can continue to “GET YOURS”. The problem is that you and I cant quite seem to agree what “YOURS AND MINE” is.

    You want people to die. I want people to live. You want them to starve. I want them to flourish.

    The planet on the other hand will decide and reducing co2 to 1990 levels is hardly going to matter at all. period….It is quite simply a means to kill people by starving them……

    ergo……NAZI. And you my friend are a climate NAZI. Even your anger boils over whenever your confronted with truth.

  13. Jeffery says:

    Laim,

    The planet thrived.

    40 million years ago.

    By what criteria did the planet thrive? Lots of chlorophyll-containing biomass? And that’s relevant to man today because?

    The planet on the other hand will decide…

    How does a planet decide anything? Are bacteria “deciding”? Fungi? Algae? Plankton? Oaks? Grasses? Soil? Rocks? Atmosphere? Lion? Tigers? Bears? Oh my.

    You are also constructing a straw man argument by saying we must suddenly halt all use of fossil fuels. The human “intelligence” that you dismiss and despise (obviously from experience) does not require halting all fossil fuel use. That’s the silly argument that you are making.

    I gave up being passive-aggressive when I reached puberty. You on the other hand…

    Only two things make me angry. Willful ignorance and cruelty.

    So yes. Fuck you. And do you even know what Nazism is? I didn’t think so. To you it’s a word you can use as a cudgel.

    You want people to die. I want people to live. You want them to starve. I want them to flourish.

    With cons, it’s always projection. Nothing in your “arguments” demonstrates that you want humanity to survive. You want tropical plants to live. You want humans to die.

    That said, you do make a novel argument:

    Humans should commit suicide so that vascular plants can once again “thrive”.

    Kudos.

    Your kind of folk logic results from trying to reconcile science with magical thinking or religion. Or you make your living from fossil fuels.

    Like I said, you’re what a dumb guy thinks a smart guy sounds like.

  14. Liam Thomas says:

    Kevin Saul Alinsky would be proud of you. Let me try to address all your points.

    1. I never said I want MANKIND to live. I simply said that I want people to live. I want them to flourish for the short time they are going to be on this planet.

    2. A team lead by Physicist Martin Hoffert estimates that by 2050 the world will need 30 terawatts of primary energy and that at least half of it will need to come from non-fossil sources.

    However upon further delving into the report it is technologically impossible to generate 25 terawatts by 2050 or anything anywhere close to this amount.

    3. As for the planet flourishing 40 million years ago. Its very relative my friend. There was no man on this planet at that time and this planet was a lush paradise for the existing lifeforms on the planet at that time……Plants, bacteria, virus and single cell organisms.

    4. I have not asked for any of your bonafides in order to discuss this subject but it is a great Saul Alinksy tactic to tear down not the argument but the person. If you destroy the person you destroy the argument.

    5. AS for the oceans rising by 50-100 feet. There is a remote possiblity that could happen….in say 16,000-25,000 years.

    Geology shows us this with perfectly perserved tidal markers that can be compared with core samples taken in both Greenland and the Antarctic that tells us how much co2, oxygen, and methane were in the air during any given geologic event.

    Additionally we have a really nice coral reef that has been studied extensively to back up the conclusions reached by unintelligent geologists(of which I suppose according to you I can count myself as one) which supports the idea that while it is possible for the oceans to rise 69 feet it will take 10’s of thousands of years to accomplish this and man in his vanity will only increase the sea water rise by about 1 percent……so instead of the oceans rising 69 feet in 20,000 years it will take 19,000 years because of that pesky virus called man.

  15. Jeffery says:

    4. I have not asked for any of your bonafides in order to discuss this subject…

    Priceless. We should all feel privileged that you would lower yourself to enlighten us with your mythology. You hint that you’re a geologist. What energy company do you work for?

    … but it is a great Saul Alinksy tactic to tear down not the argument but the person. If you destroy the person you destroy the argument.

    This from someone whose opening salvo was to call others Nazis. Excuse me if I’m unimpressed by your logic, such as it is.

    5. AS for the oceans rising by 50-100 feet

    .

    Did I say that?

    If you are a professional geologist would you be kind enough to tell us of how you developed your theory of how the Earth has an “immune response” that will reject humans?

  16. Jeffery says:

    A final question: In general, when do you think Gaia will finally kill all humans?

    1000, 5000, 10000, 50000, a million years

  17. Liam Thomas says:

    I no more know the answer to this then you know the answer to how the earth will be affected by global warming.

    I only surmise it will happen. To what extent and on which date is uncertain and relies upon events that are not predictable, cannot be modeled and therefor have no scientific basis.

    As for bonafides. I feel confident in what I speak…or I dont speak. I personally do not care if we burn another gallon of gasoline or drill another bbl of oil.

    My only concern with all things is the truth and I know that those preaching catastrophic climate change have an agenda. My agenda is the truth. If I could find something in the real unaltered evidence that suggested there was merit to their position I would be on board.

    But there is none. The only real evidence I have gathered that does not bode well for the future is in the study of heat retention in the oceans.

    This heat retention could in effect cause a complete shut down of the Currents that bring warm water up the east coast and over to England and Ireland and Northern Europe.

    Geologic evidence points to a sudden shut down of the northern currents(Geologically speaking this took about 200 years to accomplish.) This event brought us the last full blown ice age. With no more warm water flowing the ice reached all the way to florida.

    As for the end of the world I will predict this. We are scheduled for a couple events. Yellowstone has errupted three times. The current Caldera is bulging to the point that the water from yellowstone lake has shifted by dozens of feet at one end. These erruptions occur roughly every 600,000 years.

    Its been 640,000 years since the last erruption. 6-8-10 vents opening up in this massive Caldera could be a life ender and would certainly end the earths population problems.

    This is the most likely scenario for the earth to scrub itself of Co2 and methane. The resulting venting would throw an estimated 1500 square kilometers(educated guess) of pumice and ash into the air covering the entire globe.

    Starvation would ensue, most like 5-6 billion people would die. The resulting event would trigger the next catastrophic ice age in which man in small clans might eek out an existence in a world gone mad.

    And just when you think things are getting better……the next ELE hits Earth. Extinction level event.

    Man will never survive all this. So I can tell you with certainty barring star trek type space travel….mankind is destined to end…..its all a matter of HOW the events unfold that tell the story.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8296 access attempts in the last 7 days.