If All You See…

By William Teach July 26, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful low carbon bike traversing carbon offset purchased trees, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Deplorable Climate Science Blog, with a post on the number of forest fires declining.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 31 Comments | Trackback URL

If You Can’t Spend 50 Cents On A Stamp, Are You Really Invested In Voting?

By William Teach July 26, 2018 – 10:56 am

The cost of a regular stamp this year is a whopping 50 cents. Think on that

From the article

In a move to boost voter turnout, Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday signed a bill that requires counties to prepay postage for mail-in ballots in California elections.

The measure was proposed by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego), who said it is necessary to remove an obstacle to voting, especially for young people who are less likely to use the postal system and have stamps in the age of emails and text messages.

“Once again, California leads the way to make voting more accessible to all of our citizens,” Gonzalez Fletcher said in a statement. “No stamps? No problem!”

State officials say the requirement would have cost county elections agencies some $5.5 million if it had been in place for the 2016 general election, when 8.4 million people voted by mail in California and the average cost of postage was 65 cents per envelope. After the law goes into effect at the beginning of 2019, counties will be allowed to file claims with the state seeking reimbursement of postage costs.

Why is postage so much in California? The official Postal Service rate is 50 cents. Regardless, if you can’t spend 50 cents, giving up one can of soda every two elections, are you really invested? Oh, wait, let’s make this cray-cray

Gonzalez Fletcher contended the current requirement to put a stamp on mail ballots is a de facto poll tax.

“Nobody should be disenfranchised because they forgot to put a stamp on their ballot,” she said.

Read: If You Can’t Spend 50 Cents On A Stamp, Are You Really Invested In Voting? »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Chief Science Officer From Met Office Let’s The Cat Out Of The Bag On Current “Heat Wave”

By William Teach July 26, 2018 – 7:38 am

The Met Office is one of the chief suppliers of climate data to Warmists around the world, including the UN IPCC. So, this comment did not go over well with Warmists, such as at far left The Canary

The BBC was too late deleting a tweet that spoke volumes about its climate change reporting

On 24 July, Prof Stephen Belcher appeared on BBC Newsnight. As the Met Office’s chief scientist, he gave an expert opinion about the reasons behind soaring temperatures in Europe and around the world. But after the broadcast, the BBC tweeted:

“The heatwave that we’ve got is probably part of natural cycles in the weather” – The Chief Scientist at the Met Office, Stephen Belcher, explains the significance of this summer’s heatwave.

Although it subsequently deleted the tweet, it was too little, too late. The BBC needs to raise its game in reporting on climate change.

See, here’s what they see as the problem

https://twitter.com/loftymonkey/status/1022070976241131520

First, the Fox Derangement Syndrome is hilarious, especially when we’re talking about a pretty far left Progressive outlet like the BBC. Second, the full quote doesn’t change anything, because no inference as to whether the warming is natural, manmade, or some part of each is mentioned. Warm periods have been happening throughout the Holocene (and surely throughout the lifetime of the Earth’s atmosphere), and they were all pretty much natural. This one is no different.

Read: Chief Science Officer From Met Office Let’s The Cat Out Of The Bag On Current “Heat Wave” »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Excitable Joe Crowley (D-NY) Wants Separated Illegal Aliens To Be Compensated

By William Teach July 26, 2018 – 6:56 am

I wonder if he will be sending a bill to Barack Obama, whose administration did this exact thing?

(Daily Caller) Rep. Joe Crowley suggested his belief that the families who have been separated at the border for illegally entering the country should be compensated for the pain they experienced while speaking on Capitol Hill on Wednesday.

“The damage that has been done to these children will be lifelong, to the families units as well and in fact, I suggest they need to be compensated for what this administration did to them,” Crowley stated.

“To have these children ripped apart and separated is one of the most reprehensible things I’ve witnessed in my twenty years of service here in the House of Representatives,” he continued.

Where was he during the Obama administration? We know were he won’t be come the next House session: in office, since he lost the primary to hyper-Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

But, hey, I’ll tell you want, Joe: we’ll compensate them $250 per individual apprehended, which they can they use to turn around and pay the maximum fine per 8 US Code 1325, then deport them. That’s fair, right?

Read: Excitable Joe Crowley (D-NY) Wants Separated Illegal Aliens To Be Compensated »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats, Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Excitable Joe Crowley (D-NY) Wants Separated Illegal Aliens To Be Compensated | Trackback URL

City With Streets Full Of Poo Soon To Make Plastic Straws Illegal

By William Teach July 25, 2018 – 4:02 pm

Having solved all their problems….no, wait, San Francisco hasn’t. High crime, property values almost unaffordable, used drug needles everywhere, people doing drugs openly in the street, urine and poo everywhere…

No more slurping through plastic straws in San Francisco

Soon to be heard in San Francisco: the last slurp through a plastic straw. That’s because the city’s about to make them illegal.

The Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance Tuesday that will prohibit the city’s restaurants, bars and retailers from providing customers with plastic items — such as straws, stirrers or toothpicks — beginning July 1, 2019. If the ordinance passes the board on the second reading next week, it will then be presented to Mayor London Breed.

If the mayor signs the measure, retailers will also be prohibited from selling single-use food service products made with fluorinated chemicals. Bars, restaurants and cafes would also only be allowed to provide products, such as condiment packets and napkins, upon request or at self-service stations.

“This is about changing people’s behavior,” said Supervisor Ahsha Safaì, who co-sponsored the ordinance along with Supervisor Katy Tang. “Do you really need to offer a straw with a glass of water?”

Remember, this is the same city that provides needles to drug users (4.5 million per year). But, you can’t have a straw. And, look, as an environmentalist, I can understand. But, some things go too far. Certainly, the city could have simply urged eateries and bars to reduce the number of straws they provide, make it on request, as well as ask them to take them and recycle. And, consider that, if people can’t buy straws in stores, they’ll simply go to a different city. And perhaps spend more money there.

Also, consider that a flat ban is bad for disabled people, as article after article highlights. In their rush to Do Something, these big government nanny state types really do not consider the issues beyond feeling good about themselves.

Read: City With Streets Full Of Poo Soon To Make Plastic Straws Illegal »

Posted in Enviroweenies, Nanny State | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 25, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is carbon pollution making everything hazy, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post on trade wars.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 22 Comments | Trackback URL

If Kavanaugh Is Confirmed, The Constitution Will Change So Fast Your Head Will Spin Or Something

By William Teach July 25, 2018 – 10:00 am

This is the exact reason Perry de Havilland coined the term “barking moonbat” and Michelle Malkin started calling Lefties unhinged, the twisted mind of Ian Millhiser at Think Progress. Even worse, this was found via the frontpage of Yahoo and their news

If Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed, the Constitution is going to change so fast your head will spin

Late last week, a federal appeals court divided 8-7 on whether to blow up a widespread consensus on how to read the Second Amendment and turn some of the NRA’s wildest fantasies into reality in the process. Mance v. Holder is a stark reminder of the Trump administration’s success in filling the bench with judges who, just a couple years ago, would have occupied the more extreme reaches of the judiciary. It’s also a warning about how quickly the law is likely to change if Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed.

Nihilist conservatives in the mold of Neil Gorsuch are about to capture an entire United States Court of Appeals, and that court will form a pipeline that will channel ambitious right-wing lawsuits to the Supreme Court.

What did that decisions have to do with Kavanaugh? Not really sure. The screed doesn’t really make it very clear.

The primary purpose of the Supreme Court is to maintain uniformity among the various federal courts. The Court’s own rules provide that it is especially likely to take cases where “a United States court of appeals has entered a decision in conflict with the decision of another United States court of appeals on the same important matter.” If the Fifth Circuit decides to force cases onto the Supreme Court’s docket, Chief Justice Roberts is unlikely to resist them when these cases create a genuine split among the circuits.

Which is all a long way of saying that, if Kavanaugh is confirmed, the Thomas/Gorsuch faction is likely to find itself in the driver’s seat. Many of the tactics that a more moderate conservative may use to slow the law’s steady march to the right won’t work if Gorsuch’s allies control an entire court of appeals.

Somehow, this means that the Constitution is going to immediately change. Really? How? Ian does understand that there’s a method for this, and it doesn’t involve the Supreme Court, right? Or, does he mean that the Supreme Court will enforce the actual meaning and words of the Constitution, and that that’s a Bad Thing in his world? What we do know is that these people are wackadoodle scaremongerers, and, really, the people reading Think Progress only really see the scary headline and go into apoplexy. Speaking of wackadoodle apoplexy

Read: If Kavanaugh Is Confirmed, The Constitution Will Change So Fast Your Head Will Spin Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

‘Climate Change’ Could Be Making Arctic Wolf Spiders Bigger

By William Teach July 25, 2018 – 8:11 am

I’d be willing to pay a tax to stop this from happening. Creepy little buggers

Arctic Wolf Spiders Are Getting Bigger and It Could Slow Part of Climate Change

Spiders and snakes and bugs, oh my. The world is teeming with different kinds of critters, and there’s a phobia for anything you could possibly imagine. Arachnophobia, in particular, which is the extreme fear of spiders, seems especially common in the world. According to Merriam-Webster, arachnophobia is characterized as a “pathological fear or loathing of spiders.” Studies have found that exposure therapy as well as memory-disruption therapy have been most helpful in treating phobias like this.

Well, thanks to new studies on spiders released this week, there’s good news for the planet but some bad news for anyone who might be deathly afraid of spiders. According to National Geographic, stunning new calculations show that in the Arctic tundra, arctic wolf spiders outweigh arctic wolves in biomass by a ratio of 80 to 1. That’s right, when you think of white wolves roaming around and playing in the snow in the Arctic, that idyllic picture of the landscape is not totally accurate. What you should actually be thinking of is a bunch of snowy spiders spinning webs. These new calculations also show that, thanks to climate change, those eight-legged beasts are getting bigger.

In reality, none of the articles state how much bigger. Perhaps somewhere in the paper it does, but, I’m not finding it. They do seem to have a bit more mass, and there are more of the creepy little (venomous) hairy buggers. The warming in the Arctic, which they blame almost solely on Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, has caused a change in the permafrost, giving the spiders new areas, and change their eating habits a bit, and changed the ecosphere. And we all know that everything was exactly the same during the previous 4.5 billion years prior to fossil fueled vehicles, eh?

A study from 2009 found that earlier springs and longer summers could increase the size of spiders and allow them to produce more offspring, a theory which might be proven to be correct by the PNAS study. But it’s not all terrifying news. Amanda Koltz, who conducted the PNAS study in the Arctic found that plots of land with more spiders had lower rates of decomposition, because areas with more spiders also had more populations of fungus-eating arthropods known as springtails, as reported by National Geographic. And because so many fungus-munching critters now exist in the Arctic, they’re lowering the rate of decomposition, meaning it’s keeping the ecosystem safe. Essentially, they’re helping to slow down climate change, if only a little bit.

So even if you hate them or experience arachnophobia yourself, the planet still owes a big thank you to spiders for helping us fight global warming, a little bit of permafrost at a time.

It’s almost like nature does stuff then has methods to deal with that stuff.

I’d still be willing to pay $10 a month just on tiny chance that mankind is responsible.

Read: ‘Climate Change’ Could Be Making Arctic Wolf Spiders Bigger »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

King County Council Chair Introduces Legislation On Gun Control, Goes After Law Abiding Citizens

By William Teach July 25, 2018 – 7:43 am

Gun grabbers continuously inform us that they do not want to ban guns, they just want to make them safer. And, no, they do not always want to grab them with legislation, because that looks really bad politically. So, as usual, they’ll enact legislation that makes it more difficult for law abiding citizens to have a firearm for protection, rather than going after the criminal

Gun violence can be reduced, but cities and counties will have to lead

I’m heartbroken, and frankly, I’m angry. You probably are too.

Guns are used to kill men, women and children at tragic rates here in King County and across our nation. Yet our national and state leaders continue to sit on their hands and do nothing. It’s unconscionable.

This comes from Joe McDermott, chair of the Metropolitan King County Council and a member of the King County Board of Health. Perhaps he missed that murder and attempted murder are still illegal, yet people still commit those crimes. And that it’s mostly not lawful gun owners who use firearms to commit crimes, but, hey, if they went after criminals, they might be called racists and such, told that they are violating the Constitution by their Leftwing constituents, because they seem to have a soft spot for criminals.

That’s why on Tuesday, I’m introducing three pieces of legislation to ensure King County is doing its part to help stop these tragedies.

We’re calling it the King County Gun Safety Action Plan. In my role as Metropolitan King County Council chair and a member of the King County Board of Health, I’m kicking off this effort by introducing these initiatives that have the potential to save lives.

First, I propose that public safety warning signs be posted at any place of firearm sale or discharge in King County, which will articulate the very real and significant risks to health and life inherent with firearm ownership. These signs will also provide immediate contact information for suicide-prevention and mental-health resources for individuals who might be in crisis. Once passed by the Board of Health, signs will be placed at the entrances and purchase counters of every shooting range and store selling guns in King County.

The same people have meltdowns over any sort of requirements that abortion providers have the same medical standards as a veterinarian office. And, while the part about suicide is helpful, the signs are going to end up with holes in them. The second part is the most concerning

I also propose a county ordinance requiring firearm owners to securely store their guns at all times — whether at home, in a car or anywhere else. Gun ownership is a significant responsibility. And ensuring that your gun doesn’t end up in the hands of someone who shouldn’t have it — a child, someone in a moment of crisis or domestic abuse — is the least that we should require.

It is a cynical and dangerous twist of logic that the NRA, which promotes responsible gun ownership, is suing Seattle for its recent safe-storage law. The fact is that 43 percent of King County gun owners admit to storing their firearms unlocked. We cannot wait to enact this basic, common sense requirement.

Read that again in bold. At all times. At home, car, or anywhere else. This seems to suggest that even if you are carrying a firearm openly or concealed, it has to be secured. If you’re carrying a rifle or shotgun while hunting it must be secured. What, exactly, would be the point of carrying the weapon if you must have a trigger lock on it?

The draft legislation has not been released in full, but the website for these “make it harder for law abiding citizens” gun grabbers and news articles state that “All gun owners would be required to securely store their firearms and ammunition at all times on all premises.” This would make firearms for self defense at home and out in public worthless.

Is it any wonder that the NRA and gun groups are suing?

The third proposal, when you read between the lines at the article, seems to be a way to indoctrinate kids to be anti-gun. The gun grabbers website also notes that one of the things they want to do if the state preemption law is repealed would be to “Ban semi-automatic, high velocity weapons: Ban the sale and possession of semi-automatic, high velocity weapons.” There’s no definition of that, so, would that include a 9mm handgun? What about a .22? I purchase standard Winchester ammo for my Walther P22, which will fire at around 818mph. The speed of sound is around 761mph. Would that make my P22 a high velocity weapon?

And criminals won’t give up their weapons. This just makes criminals of people who lawfully purchased a firearm.

Read: King County Council Chair Introduces Legislation On Gun Control, Goes After Law Abiding Citizens »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Climahypocrite Launches New Feminist Fight Against Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach July 24, 2018 – 5:08 pm

Let’s give it up to Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland, big shot member of the United Nations, who runs all around the world on fossil fueled vehicles, as she does this which is about something something

Mary Robinson launches new feminist fight against climate change

Women around the world who are leading the fight against climate damage are to be highlighted by Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland and UN high commissioner, in the hopes of building a new global movement that will create “a feminist solution for climate change”.

Perhaps more revolutionary still, the new initiative is light-hearted in tone, optimistic in outlook and presents positive stories in what the originators hope will be seen as a fun way.

Called Mothers of Invention, the initiative will kick off with a series of podcasts showcasing the work of grassroots climate activists at a local level, as well as globally resonant initiatives such as the legal challenges under way in numerous jurisdictions to force governments to adhere to the Paris agreement goals. Scientists and politicians feature alongside farmers and indigenous community leaders from Europe, the US and Australia to India, Kenya, South Africa and Peru.

So, what, exactly, are they going to be doing, and what makes them “feminist”?

“Climate change is a manmade problem that requires a feminist solution,” she said ahead of the podcast launch. “What we are hoping to do is create a movement. Climate change is not gender-neutral – it affects women far more. So this is not about climate change, it is about climate justice.”

The movement, she added, would grow organically from the women who feature and the women who join in: “It will be happening in an unstructured way, which is all the better, because we are not prescribing what a feminist solution should look like, we are listening – we want women to tell us what they want. That to me is more interesting.”

Huh? So, she wants women, who can’t decide what to eat or what to wear, to come up with solutions? And, by organic, she means directed by progressive Cult of Climastrology big wigs. At some point, I’m wondering if they are going to offer solutions, and change their lives to match their beliefs. Because the story doesn’t really offer anything but some yammering, calls for Other People to pay the price, and

The series will bring in issues of colonialism, racism, poverty, migration and social justice and how these are bound up with feminism and the effects of climate change, and will include related environmental issues such as plastic pollution.

In other words, this is all just left wing social justice warrior whining and Victimhood, using ‘climate change’ as an excuse. Same old bullshit.

Read: Climahypocrite Launches New Feminist Fight Against Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | Comments Off on Climahypocrite Launches New Feminist Fight Against Hotcoldwetdry | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove