If All You See…

By William Teach October 29, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is an area flooded from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on students wanting peers punished for wearing the wrong Halloween costume.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Your Halloween Decorations Are Bad For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach October 29, 2019 – 10:30 am

A holiday is approaching, so, it’s time for the climate nags to nag

Stop Decorating Your House For Halloween Unless You Want The REAL Scary Monster To Appear

The 20th of September this year was a good day for the spirit. Even old cynics like me felt a tiny ebb of hope as we watched hundreds of thousands of people taking to the street and marching to deliver a message to the government about how strongly we feel about climate change and a secure future for our children and our planet.

My soul was fed by the visions of young kids marching with posters painted by young hands, by parents marching on behalf of their children’s futures and by businesses committing themselves to actually making a difference.

But September quickly turned to October and as the threats against Greta Thunberg stopped making headline news, the spirit of consumerism started to take over from the health of the planet.

The shops started to flog Halloween paraphernalia and reinforced that the only way to celebrate this ancient Celtic festival it is to decorate. This in spite of the fact the Celts didn’t actually decorate their homes, they tended to light bonfires and dress up to scare away the ghosts. But, I realised when I protested against ghoulish plastic decorations on my Facebook page, people believe decorating their houses for Halloween is a right and a tradition they feel threatened about losing.

And we get this from the author

Then we get a lot of whining about consumerism, which is the main point, namely, that people buy stuff to decorate for Halloween (and this screeching screed even touches on Christmas)

Simmering in my plastic pumpkin induced rage I took time out to reflect on whether I was overreacting to Halloween decorations. Maybe it’s just because I don’t celebrate it. Maybe I was coming to this debate with my own filter of fear over the production and disposal of unnecessary junk, and yes I realise that’s a loaded word because some people believe deeply in their right to decorate on Halloween.

Read: Your Halloween Decorations Are Bad For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

U.S. Expected To Tell U.N. It Is Formally Withdrawing From Paris Climate Agreement On November 4th

By William Teach October 29, 2019 – 8:28 am

So, expect meltdowns from climate cultists come next Monday

Formal U.S. Withdrawal from Paris Climate Agreement Looms

One week from today, President Trump gets his earliest opportunity to make good on his pledge to pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement.

The president made it clear last week that his plans had not changed, telling an audience in Pittsburgh that staying in the climate pact would have the effect of “shutting down” American energy companies while allowing foreign firms to “pollute with impunity” (Climatewire, Oct. 24).

It’s a message the president has offered many times since June 1, 2017, when he announced the U.S. withdrawal. Since then, observers have been anticipating the arrival of Nov. 4, 2019. It’s the first day permitted under the agreement’s rules when the United States can formally request an exit. That process will take one year.

“If everything is going according to plan, which I have every reason to believe it is, Nov. 4 is the day that the United States can officially begin the process of withdrawal, per the requirements of the agreement itself,” said Mandy Gunasekara, a former senior EPA official who now heads the Energy 45 Fund, a pro-Trump advocacy group.

The earliest the United States could leave the deal is Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the presidential election. That’s contingent on the United Nations’ receiving formal notice of withdrawal 365 days earlier. Every day that the United States delays giving that notice is one day longer that the Trump administration will remain in the climate pact.

It’s a long process to pull out of the agreement, but, Trump could have simply voided the whole thing with the stroke of a pen, since that’s the way Obama joined it. It was never ratified by the U.S. Congress. It is also non-binding. And leaving is almost symbolic, since we keep hearing that all the nations who signed on are failing to uphold their pledges.

If the United States leaves the Paris accord in November 2020, it is virtually assured to rejoin in early 2021 if a Democrat wins the presidency. That could be done with a single letter and a 30-day waiting period.

The so-called nationally determined contribution (NDC) to Paris that the Obama administration offered in 2015 could be reinstated through 2025 — though it’s likely Trump-era policies have eroded the country’s ability to cut emissions 26% to 28% by 2025, as promised.

There would be challenges ahead for a Democratic president. A new president would have no ability to deliver an updated NDC next year in Glasgow. So the United States would rejoin the agreement as a delinquent member that hadn’t fulfilled its obligation to abide by its timeline.

Even staying in that reduction wouldn’t happen, just like it is not happen in the other “polluting” nations in the 1st World. Further, what they really want from the U.S. is out money. The transfer of our wealth to 3rd world shitholes developing nations in a manner which puts the U.S. on the hook, not the nation that is being given monetary aid, as had been the norm.

Just wait for Monday. If the official declaration comes, Warmists will be taking lots of fossil fueled trips to protest, using their smartphones shipped using fossil fuels which use lots of energy to document.

Read: U.S. Expected To Tell U.N. It Is Formally Withdrawing From Paris Climate Agreement On November 4th »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Media Say Pentagon Can’t Confirm That Baghdadi Was Crying Before He Blew Himself Up

By William Teach October 29, 2019 – 8:04 am

This is the kind of investigation we get when a Republican is in office. This is actually a NY Times article, “The Paper Of Record”, and spread out through more local sources, and their’s is about being unable to confirm the whimpering

Pentagon can’t confirm al-Baghdadi was crying before he died

The country’s top military officer said on Monday that he does not know where President Donald Trump got his information that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Islamic State leader, died “screaming, crying and whimpering.”

Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at a Pentagon news conference that he does not have similar information, but said Trump may have gotten his details from a conversation with military personnel on the ground who were involved in the raid.

“I know the president had planned to talk down to the unit and unit members,” Milley said. “But I don’t know what the source of that was. I assume it was talking directly to unit and unit members.”

His comments echoed those made the day before, by Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper, who also said he did not have the same “details” that Trump shared with the country about the Islamic State leader’s last moments.

White House officials have declined to say how the president got the information about al-Baghdadi’s “screaming” and “whimpering” during the raid. Some echoed the Pentagon assertion that Trump may have spoken with commanders or Delta Force team members on the ground.

First, this is meant to attempt to softly convey that Trump might maybe be making it up, especially since so many on the Left were Very Upset that Trump described Baghdadi in those terms, ie, “screaming, crying, and whimpering”, because the Left is deranged. I’m betting all the victims of Baghdadi and ISIS were happy to hear about him going out that way, even if Trump did make it up or embellish. Seriously, who cares if he did? Baghdadi was a horrible, horrible, evil person.

But, you know, Orange Man Bad, so, the media looks to undercut him and ask these questions. This is the same media asking for confirmation of the screaming, crying, and whimpering that refused to ask questions on Operation Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, the Benghazi attack, Hillary Clinton’s server, the payoff to Iran, and so many other issues. But, now they can ask if Baghdadi was crying, screaming, and whimpering? And they wonder why they’re accused of bias and being in the pocket of Democrats?

Read: Media Say Pentagon Can’t Confirm That Baghdadi Was Crying Before He Blew Himself Up »

Posted in Donald Trump, ISIS, Wonky Media | 35 Comments | Trackback URL

Museums Are Now Sexist Or Something

By William Teach October 28, 2019 – 3:31 pm

Some people really need to dig deep to be Offended about stuff. It really is always something

‘Sexist’ Natural History Museums Biased Towards Dead Males

Researchers have accused the world’s leading Natural History Museums – in New York, Washington DC, Chicago, Paris and London – of sexist bias.

They discovered this after counting the number of male specimens in the collection and discovering that they outnumber female ones.

Male birds outnumber female birds by 60 per cent to 40 per cent and mammals are 52 per cent male and 48 per cent female.

Although the researchers acknowledge the fairly obvious reason for this – collectors are attracted to “species with showy male traits like colourful plumage and horns” and thus tend to overlook the generally smaller, drabber female ones – they insist that this is an imbalance that needs correcting.

They claim:

 If collections are biased towards one sex, studies may not be representative of the species.

According to the study’s lead dead-animal-counter, quoted in the Manchester Evening News, this ‘bias’ needs ‘improvement.’

Right, right, it’s a bias. Maybe an unconscious one?

Dr Natalie Cooper, of the Natural History Museum, in London, who authored the report, said: “There is a tendency for the people collecting to want to get the largest grizzly bear or the animal with the most impressive horns.”

The animals were all collected between 1751 and 2018, but things didn’t improve over time.

Dr Cooper added: “Interestingly, we see no improvement. Even recent collections are biased.”

Damned nature, mostly making the males larger and brighter colored! Ban them!

Read: Museums Are Now Sexist Or Something »

Posted in Special Snowflake Syndrome | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 28, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…are horrible plastic cups, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Patterico’s Pontifications, with a post saying goodbye to Democrat Katie Hill.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

You Need To Watch Netflix In Low Definition To Stop ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach October 28, 2019 – 12:03 pm

Climate cultists might want to rethink this push, because it will surely turn the young folks against the Cult

From the article

Movie nights once required driving to the local video store to rent, rewind and return the latest blockbuster. Now on-demand video content providers offer countless binge-worthy options at the touch of a finger.

But experts say the ease of streaming services comes with a hefty environmental price tag.

Watching a half-hour show would lead to emissions of 1.6 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent, said Maxime Efoui-Hess of French think tank the Shift Project. That’s equivalent to driving 3.9 miles (6.28 kilometres).

Last year, online  streaming produced emissions equivalent to Spain and that amount may double in the next six years, according to the Shift Project.

We’re doomed! I don’t have Netflix, but, I do have Amazon prime

While most of the online traffic—34 percent—is related to streaming videos, on Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu, for example, the next biggest sector is online porn.

“Digital videos come in very large file sizes and (are) getting bigger with each new generation of higher definition video,” said Gary Cook of Greenpeace, which monitors the IT sector’s energy footprint.

These younger folks are going to be very upset, since they are rather upfront on their watching of porn. Anyhow, there’s lots of discussion on the increase in streaming, the expected increases, especially adding Disney and Apple to streaming, the size of TV screens, which use more electricity, 4K broadcasts and TVs. So, what can you do?

Experts suggest that viewers disable autoplay and stream over Wi-Fi in lower-definition formats. The  is watching over a 3G connection on a mobile device, said Lefevre.

The Shift Project offers a browser extension that monitors , displaying the amount of electricty used, the CO2 that electricity produces, and how far the user would have to drive to match those emissions.

I don’t turn off autoplay for ‘climate change’, but, because it’s annoying. They keep finding ways around it, though. As for watching in lower definition? Not going to happen.

Read: You Need To Watch Netflix In Low Definition To Stop ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

People Of The Future Will Be Shocked That Trump Wasn’t Impeached Over The Climate Crisis Or Something

By William Teach October 28, 2019 – 7:30 am

This is a scorching Hotcold Take, where Esquire manages to combine two Leftist moonbat things

Someday, They’ll Be Amazed We Didn’t Impeach Trump Over the Climate Crisis
Yeah, Ukraine. But actively undermining our efforts to combat an existential threat to human civilization as we know it surely qualifies as a high crime.

You almost do not even have to go further than the headline and subhead. Anyhow, after discussing the wildfires in California (which happen every year, including during Obama’s terms, so, why didn’t we impeach him over it?), we get The Crazy, so, do not be drinking anything

…But someday, assuming we make it that far, future generations will surely wonder why we did not remove him from the world’s most powerful office simply because he denied the existence of a fundamental threat to human civilization as we know it. The president has not just said the climate crisis is a Chinese hoax, or suggested he has some different opinion on whether it’s a problem compared to the scientists—you know, people who have devoted their lives to studying this phenomenon. He has actively rolled back our efforts in pretty much every department, to combat a crisis that will upend not just our children’s lives, but our own.

Surely, this constitutes a high crime against humanity. His apparatchiks will laugh at the suggestion now (yes, we will), and call it liberal delusion. But soon enough, they won’t be laughing. The people who actually know a goddamn thing about this say we have 12 years to change course in order to avoid this onrushing doom. The president wants to dig more crap out of the ground. He’d like to force New York State to do it, to abandon its commitment to future generations so some energy executives—who perhaps have some sort of relationship with the president—can make a buck.

 

Read: People Of The Future Will Be Shocked That Trump Wasn’t Impeached Over The Climate Crisis Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Barking Moonbats, Donald Trump, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

AP Reminds Us That Obama’s “JV Team” Still Poses A Threat

By William Teach October 28, 2019 – 7:04 am

This is very interesting. When President Bush 43 was prosecuting the war against al Qaeda, we were told that we just needed to kill Osama and the whole thing would fall apart. This was known as the “Queen Bee” theory. When Osama was whacked under Barack Obama, we were told that AQ was dead. In fact, AQ was significantly reduced already due to killing lots of AQ members and making it hard to operate. Osama wasn’t really in control at the time, it was Ayman al-Zawahiri (Osama needed to die, though, with prejudice). But, jihadis were still out there. But, now that the ISIS/ISIL leader was forced to blow himself up, something has changed, as the AP tells us

Islamic State still poses a threat after al-Baghdadi’s death

Eliminating the Islamic State group’s elusive leader gives President Donald Trump a new argument for leaving Syria, but the U.S. military campaign against the extremists is far from finished.

The killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi by U.S. forces leaves the Islamic State without an obvious leader, a major setback for an organization that in March was forced by American troops and Kurdish forces out of the last portion of its self-declared “caliphate,” which once spanned a swath of Iraq and Syria.

But the militant group, which arose from the remnants of al-Qaida in Iraq after that group’s defeat by U.S.-led forces in 2008, has ambitions to regenerate again. And it remains a dangerous threat in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond.

“The bottom line is: This puts the enemy on its heels, but the ideology — and this sounds so cliched — it is not dead,” said Chris Costa, a former senior director for counterterrorism for the National Security Council in the Trump administration.

Key to the Islamic States is its “kill where you are” ethos, encouraging a far-flung network of followers, including those in the United States, to commit violence however and wherever they can. That jihadist message is likely to live on, even with the death of al-Baghdadi.

This is all very interesting. We were told that they were the JV by Obama, and their atrocities were minimized by the media while Obama was in office. Not too mention that the danger from Islamic terrorism was minimized. Heck, this is the type of article that would have CAIR and other useful idiots screeching about Islamophobia, is it not?

According to defense officials in Iraq and Afghanistan who study Islamic State and have watched its movements, the group is growing in power and numbers outside of Syria.

Its flagship affiliate is known as ISIS-Khorasan in Afghanistan, and it is expanding into other countries, including Pakistan, Tajikistan, Iran, India, Bangladesh and Indonesia. Many of those affiliates have liaisons in the terror group’s hub in eastern Afghanistan.

Radical Islam is constantly growing. It’s being taught in Islamic schools and mosques, on the Internet, through radicalization programs spread from those to get people to join. It’s often subtle prodding and pushing and cajoling. Along with those raised to radicalism in beliefs, with some steps to becoming a jihadi.

Funny how they like to tell us this stuff after ISIS’ leader blows himself up when cornered while a Republican is in office, eh? Oh, and we’re also getting this again

Read: AP Reminds Us That Obama’s “JV Team” Still Poses A Threat »

Posted in ISIS, RoP | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 27, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is produce that is terrible because of all the road miles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Newsbusters, with a post on NBC whining about Trump taking a victory lap over the killing of ISIS head.

It’s shorts week.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 21 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove