…is a horrendous fossil fueled machine causing tectonic action, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post wondering what would happen if a GOP admin sicced the CIA and FBI on a political opponent.
Ideas for next week’s theme?
Read: If All You See… »
So, we had a big hurricane year in 2017, meaning it’s time for the Dire Prognostications Of Doom to sally forth
Record Heat Means Hurricanes Gain Ferocity Faster
Hurricanes are becoming more violent, more rapidly, than they did 30 years ago. The cause may be entirely natural, scientists say.
But Hurricane Harvey, which in 2017 assaulted the Gulf of Mexico and dumped unprecedented quantities of rain to cause devastating floods in Texas, happened because the waters of the Gulf were warmer than at any time on record. And they were warmer because of human-driven climate change, according to a second study.
Both studies examine the intricate machinery of a natural phenomenon, the tropical cyclone. Researchers from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory looked at how fast four of 2017’s hurricanes—Harvey, Irma, Jose and Maria—intensified: episodes in which maximum wind speed rose by at least 25 knots, which is more than 46 kilometers (approximately 29 miles), per hour within a 24-hour period. They report in Geophysical Research Letters that they combed through 30 years of satellite data from 1986 to 2015 to find a pattern.
Researchers have repeatedly warned that hurricane hazard must increase with global warming, driven by profligate human combustion of fossil fuels that dump greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Hurricanes will hit higher latitudes and deliver more damage within the Gulf of Mexico. But climate change is only part of the answer.
The latest study did not find that storms were intensifying rapidly more often than usual. But the researchers did find that when a storm grew at speed, it became much more powerful within a 24-hour period than such storms did 30 years ago: wind speeds had gained 3.8 knots or seven kilometers (approximately 4.3 miles) an hour for each of the three decades.
So, while it could be natural, no, is has to be due to you, yes you, driving a fossil fueled vehicle.
It’s also your fault over the low hurricane, particularly major hurricane, activity from 2006-2016. Regardless, a 30 year peak at data discounts not only the rest of this current warm period, which started in the mid to late 1800’s, but what happens during a cool period. Warmists are making judgements, opinions, not science.
You know what will happen now, though, right? The Gore Effect, where hurricane activity will crash once again.
Read: Record Heat Means More Ferocious Hurricanes Or Something »
And this is how it works: a leading media outlet manufactures some sort of Outrage, in this case the utterly out of context “animals” quote. They then correct, or sorta correct, the “mistake”, meaning they got caught. But, by that point, they’ve gotten their mistake into the leftist talking points, and the leftists run wild. That’s how we end up with this schlock at Vox
It’s not just rhetoric: Trump’s policies treat immigrants like me as “animalsâ€
Trump’s rhetoric and agencies like ICE immigration enforcement dehumanize immigrants.“We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals.â€
This is what President Trump said on Wednesday during a roundtable meeting with top officials of his administration and California politicians to discuss California’s new “sanctuary†law. It’s a little unclear whether these “animals†he was referencing were undocumented immigrants as a whole, as he seemed to imply, or specifically members of the MS-13 gang, which was the subject of some previous questions. Regardless, the comments went viral: Without missing a beat, the internet and the media were swift to castigate Trump over his deplorable remarks.
No, it’s not unclear, that’s just a cop-out to continue your rant.
I’m an immigration advocate and a recipient of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy. I’ve been following the Trump administration’s words and actions closely on immigration issues because my future depends on it. The “animals†comments are nothing new: Trump has consistently dehumanized immigrants as a group, comparing all of us to rapists and gang members from the earliest days of his campaign.
You’re in the country illegally. Don’t want to be dehumanized? Leave.
The ambiguity — whether Trump was dehumanizing gang members or all undocumented immigrants — is predictably being exploited by conservative politicians, including Trump himself, and pundits who make the case that the “fake news†media is being unfair to the president.
Wait, is there a problem with dehumanizing gang members now? Really? Here comes the big spin
But that argument fails to recognize that whether Trump meant MS-13 gang members or immigrants as a whole doesn’t really matter: In his eyes, and in the directives that have shaped his policies, they are one and the same. Equating these groups is impacting real lives — Trump officials do it in their rhetoric, and they do it in their policies.
Don’t like it? Leave. You’re hear in violation of our laws. You’re sucking up resources and money meant for U.S. citizens and those who are legally present.
Trump has vilified immigrants and their contributions every step of the way.
You aren’t an immigration. Immigrants come to the U.S. legally. You didn’t. And this kind of schtick is a main reason that illegals, at least those who aren’t scumbag animal gang members and serious criminals, aren’t getting any sympathy from Conservatives, who tend to be way more religious than liberals: these unhinged demands and screeds push us away. Instead of being abusive when you’re in violation of the law, try being nice and asking politely. You do not get to demand anything. Personally, I’m at the point of just saying “deport them all.”
Read: Trump’s Immigration Policies Are Dehumanizing And Treat Illegals As Animals Or Something »
Trackback URL
This is pretty much expected out of the NY Times which is itself protected by armed security, and seems to be a reprint of an article they ran on February 15th, with a few changes
How Congress Has Dithered as the Innocent Get Shot
Once again, Americans are facing a tragedy involving guns. This time, at least 10 people were killed during an attack at a Texas high school Friday.
More than five years have passed since the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where 20 children and six adults were killed. In that time, dozens of gun safety proposals have been introduced in Congress attempting to fix glaring issues with gun safety and regulation. More than 1,600 mass shootings have taken place in America since then.
Here is a guide to what Congress has — or, more accurately, has not — accomplished during this time.
They offer a long “interactive” calendar related to “Congressional inaction” with the header
Gun control laws included here are: expanding background checks, closing the “Charleston loophole,†improving record reporting, closing the “terror gap,†banning bump stocks, addressing gun trafficking, closing the “boyfriend loophole,†and creating a “red flags†process. A mass shooting involves four or more people injured or killed in a single event at the same time and location. Mass shooting estimates available after Jan. 13, 2013.
Not one of these things would have stopped the Santa Fe shooter, Dimitrios Pagourtzis, 17. Not a one. And this is why we can’t have a rational, reasonable, adult conversation on sensible gun laws to reduce shootings. Virtually none of the myriad ideas from the gun grabbers would have worked, either
(Buzzfeed) He used a .38-caliber revolver and a shotgun that belonged to his father, Abbott said. However, authorities did not know if the father was aware that his son had taken the weapons.
Santa Fe ISD police said explosive devices were found at the school and off campus, including at a home and a vehicle. And bomb squads spent much of the day carefully searching two residences believed to be associated with the suspect.
Murder and attempted murder are illegal. So are bombs. He used weapons that the gun grabbers typically approve of, rather than scary “assault rifles.” Heck, one of the guns was Joe Biden approved. So nothing in the NY Times Editorial Boards screed would have made a difference, other than red flag laws
At the same time, investigators were struggling to find any signs that could have foreshadowed the level of violence seen Friday.
“One of the frustrating things in the early status of this case, unlike Parkland and Sutherland Springs, there were not those type of warning signs,” Abbott said. “We have what are often categorized as red flag warnings.”
“Here the red flags warnings were either nonexistent or imperceptible. There is on his Facebook page a T-shirt that says ‘Born to Kill.’ But as far as investigations by law enforcement agencies, as far as arrests or confrontation with law enforcement, as far as having a criminal history, he has none. His slate is pretty clean.”
So, no red flags, either. Everyone seems to be describing him as a “quiet kid.” He had some pictures of a few weapons, one of which was an arcade game, on his social media. And a pic of him wearing a bisexual pride pin. And, potentially, some Antifa stuff. Still, no red flags.
So, what would you have us do now, gun grabbers? Nickolas Kristoff has a long screed, of which the majority makes it harder for law abiding citizens to purchase, possess, and or carry firearms for protection. Heck, harder for their much used talking point about hunting. It punishes and controls the law abiding, while playing games in allowing suits against gun manufacturers, which is a means to put them out of business. Can’t buy something not made. But, there is almost nothing that goes after the criminals and those who would use guns illegally. Because this is about disarmament of the law abiding. Democrats seem to like criminals.
Trackback URL
It’s all your fault, for driving a fossil fueled vehicle, eating cheeseburgers (double cow badness), and not setting your AC to 85
Holding global warming to 2.75 degrees Fahrenheit saves most species
The world’s nations can protect the vast majority of plant and animal species from climate change by limiting global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, a new study finds.
The report, published Thursday in the journal Science, is the first to examine how species across the globe would benefit from restricting global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial averages – the lower limit for temperature as outlined in the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
The findings suggest that meeting this goal would avoid half the risks associated with warming of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit – the upper limit established by the agreement – for plants and animals, and two-thirds of the risk for insects. Species in Europe, Southern Africa, Australia and the Amazon would benefit the most.
Well, good news, so far we’ve only seen a rise of 1.5F since 1850 (and potentially less, depending on the hard data). These same plants and animals survived plenty of climatic changes over millions and millions of years, much less the last 20 years since the ice age ended, and came out fine. And insects, too
Climate change on track to cause major insect wipeout, scientists warn
Global warming is on track to cause a major wipeout of insects, compounding already severe losses, according to a new analysis.
Insects are vital to most ecosystems and a widespread collapse would cause extremely far-reaching disruption to life on Earth, the scientists warn. Their research shows that, even with all the carbon cuts already pledged by nations so far, climate change would make almost half of insect habitat unsuitable by the end of the century, with pollinators like bees particularly affected.
However, if climate change could be limited to a temperature rise of 1.5C – the very ambitious goal included in the global Paris agreement – the losses of insects are far lower.
Everything is doooooom with these people, at least according to their computer models, which assume that all life on Earth can only survive in a tiny, itty bitty, teensie weenie temperature range.
But, hey, it’s all something that can be fixed with a good carbon tax, you know.
Read: Plants And Animals Which Survived Previous Warm And Cold Periods Now In Danger Of Total Doom »
Trackback URL
…is a sea that is totally rising dozens of feet, you might just be a Warist
The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on yet another fake racist accusation against a police officer.
Read: If All You See… »
But, then, everything is bad for ‘climate change’, even if it causes nice, pleasant days which are good for taking someone out for a nice lunch just to say “thank you for being you”
The first peer-reviewed study of bitcoin’s energy consumption confirms our fears:
Bitcoin’s energy consumption is growing at 20% *per month* and is effectively erasing decades of progress on renewable energy.https://t.co/JnYEq3uExi
— Eric Holthaus (@EricHolthaus) May 17, 2018
From the article
Bitcoin’s energy footprint has more than doubled since Grist first wrote about it six months ago.
It’s expected to double again by the end of the year, according to a new peer-reviewed study out Wednesday. And if that happens, bitcoin would be gobbling up 0.5 percent of the world’s electricity, about as much as the Netherlands.
That’s a troubling trajectory, especially for a world that should be working overtime to root out energy waste and fight climate change. By late next year, bitcoin could be consuming more electricity than all the world’s solar panels currently produce — about 1.8 percent of global electricity, according to a simple extrapolation of the study’s predictions. That would effectively erase decades of progress on renewable energy.
See, here’s the thing: Warmists say they want to totally transform economies and the energy sector to make everything less energy intensive, more efficient, and so much more. But, when you more things more and more into the digital age, you use……..electricity!
Surprise!
Read: Bummer: Cryptocurrency Is Totally Bad For ‘Climate Change’ »
The day after the NY Times utterly took President Trump out of context (which led to many, many, many leftist media outlets, personalities, and elected Democrats to follow suit) regarding his MS-13 are animals remark, the NY Times is doubling down on their #TDS
Trump Defends ‘Animals’ Remark, Saying It Referred to MS-13 Gang Members
President Trump on Thursday defended his use of the word “animals†to describe dangerous criminals trying to cross into the United States illegally, saying that he had been referring to members of the brutal transnational gang MS-13 when he used language critics called inappropriate.
“I’m referring, and you know I’m referring, to the MS-13 gangs that are coming in,†Mr. Trump told a reporter who asked him about the remark, a day after using the term during a White House meeting about immigration. “We have laws that are laughed at on immigration. So when the MS-13 comes in, when the other gang members come into our country, I refer to them as animals. And guess what — I always will.â€
The president was doubling down on a statement he made on Wednesday at a round-table discussion with state and local officials from California, at which Mr. Trump and his guests criticized the state’s so-called sanctuary laws, which restrict communication between local law enforcement and federal immigration officers. He used the word as one of the officials argued that the state laws made it more difficult for her to share information with immigration authorities about dangerous criminals, including MS-13 members.
“We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — we’re stopping a lot of them,†Mr. Trump said in response, during a session where he complained that the United States has “the dumbest laws on immigration in the world.â€
“You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are,†the president added. “These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before.â€
And this Times article still leaves out the full context.
Here is the full context of President Trump’s “animals” comment during the immigration/sanctuary city roundtable, which came as a Sheriff was complaining about restrictions placed on ICE databases, and MS-13 gang members. pic.twitter.com/sI9uWXr1Sc
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 17, 2018
In context, Trump is talking about MS-13. Period. Full stop. And, why would Trump even need to defend calling MS-13 animals? They are. But
https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/997294282192154630
Democrats all over the place are trying to spin their defense of slamming Trump for calling MS-13 animals once it became known that that’s what the comment was about in context. If Trump came out and said he was 100% for abortion on demand, Democrats would suddenly be 100% against it.
Once again, we see that the object of gun control from the gun grabbers is not to go after those who use firearms in an unlawful manner, but to make it more difficult for lawful gun owners
Washington: NRA Files Legal Challenge Against Misleading Ballot Title for Gun Control Initiative
Yesterday, NRA filed a legal challenge in the Thurston County Superior Court objecting to the misleading and inadequate ballot title for Initiative 1639, which seeks to further restrict the Second Amendment rights of Washington’s law-abiding citizens.  The Thurston County Superior Court will review all legal challenges before the ballot title and summary can be finalized for the initiative.
Initiative 1639, filed by Michael Bloomberg’s front group, the Alliance for Gun Responsibility, is an egregious attack on Second Amendment freedoms and comes just months after failing to enact their gun ban agenda in Olympia.  Proponents of this 22-page initiative will have until July 6th to get 259,622 valid signatures to place the initiative on the November ballot.
The article rather forgets to mention what that title is, but, that’s not my focus. The details of the ballot initiative are (all bold theirs)
Require a 10 Day Waiting Period for Commonly Owned Rifles. Â All semi-automatic rifle purchases and transfers would be subjected to a waiting period of 10 business days. (all. Not just the scary assault rifles. Moving the goal posts)
Establish a Government Registry of Firearms.  Current law states the Washington Department of Licensing (DOL) “may†keep copies of pistol purchase applications.  The proposed initiative would instead require the DOL to keep copies of these purchase applications, and would expand this government registry to include semi-automatic rifle purchases.
Require Completion of a Training Course to Purchase Rifles. Â This initiative would also require all purchasers of semi-automatic rifles to show they have completed a firearm safety training course within the last five years in order to proceed with the sale. (actually, I would be OK with this one, but, you can certainly see how the gun grabbers would start making this course really, really expensive and/or really difficult to pass to further restrict lawful rifle ownership)
Impose up to a $25 Purchase Fee (GUN TAX) for Semi-Automatic Rifles.  The Washington Department of Licensing would be allowed to charge up to a $25 fee for each semi-automatic rifle purchase. (yet another tax grab)
Require Gun Owners to Lock Up their Firearms or Face Criminal Charges.  Individuals would be required to lock up their firearms or potentially face a criminal charge of “Community Endangerment Due to Unsafe Storage of a Firearm†if the firearm is accessed by a prohibited person or minor.  This intrusive proposal invades people’s homes and forces them to render their firearms useless in a self-defense situation by locking them up.
Restricts Adults Aged 18-20 from Acquiring Modern Rifles.  Adults aged 18-20 would be prohibited from purchasing semi-automatic rifles and would not be allowed to receive them through a transfer or loan.  The proposed initiative would deny a segment of law-abiding adults from access to the most modern and effective firearms for self-defense, thus depriving them of their constitutional rights.
Require “Warnings†for Firearm Purchases.  All firearm purchases would come with a notification about the “inherent risks†of firearm ownership as an attempt to further stigmatize firearms.
This is typical of what we see from the gun grabbers: putting the burden on lawful gun owners, while doing zero about criminals.
Read: Bloomberg Front Group Pushing Initiative That Effect Lawful Gun Owners In Washington »
Unsurprisingly, the ‘climate change’ conference seems to be more of a hotbed of Progressive (nice Fascism) bloviating
McKenna rallies G7 women ‘kicking it’ on climate change as tax watchdog laments gas levies
As the countdown to next month’s G7 summit in Charlevoix continues, Environment Minister Catherine McKenna is bringing “women climate leaders†from around the world to Canada — and specifically, Meech Lake — for Women Kicking It On Climate, a one-day working session to discuss climate change solutions that will, according to the advisory, “contribute to women’s empowerment†and “gender equality†while also “advancing the Paris Agreement.â€
And Warmists wonder why I say that the vast majority of this “issue” is political, not scientific. It’s all linked together: ‘climate change’, SJW stuff, empowering big government, raising taxes and fees, controlling citizens and the private sector. Seriously, if we were totally doomed from trace amounts of CO2, one would think they could do this via teleconference, rather than flights from all over the world spreading “carbon pollution.”
Read: Women Kicking It On Climate To Take Long Fossil Fueled Flights Or Something »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.