Bummer: ‘Climate Change’ Causes Little Known Tribe To Give Up Being Vegan

By William Teach August 9, 2017 – 3:49 pm

Is there anything that Hotcoldwetdry can’t do?

Climate change effect: Ladakhi tribe no longer vegan

The little-known Brokpa tribals of Ladakh, who claim to have been vegans for some 2,200 years of their existence, are slowly opting for an alternative diet including dairy products, eggs and meat — thanks to climate change.

Climate change has made summer and winter warmer and seen the advent of pests, leading to a significant drop in their traditional crops, forcing the Brokpa to change their lifestyle.

“We have had to shift to an alternative lifestyle, not exactly what the Brokpa once used to be. People also consume meat. Some old folks still avoid this, but eggs, meat and milk are on the menu,” Tsering Namjial, the Nambardar or head of Dha village, told this visiting IANS correspondent.

This is all Al Gore’s fault your fault for refusing to give up your fossil fueled vehicle, refusing to move to a tiny home, and refusing to live like it’s 1499.

Read: Bummer: ‘Climate Change’ Causes Little Known Tribe To Give Up Being Vegan »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 9, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is evil carbon polluting (and sexist) cheese that comes from evil carbon polluting, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on a USC cleared of rape charges who could still be expelled.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

New Republic: Al Gore’s Massive Carbon Footprint Doesn’t Matter Or Something

By William Teach August 9, 2017 – 10:33 am

In case you hadn’t noticed, I’ve mentioned the whole “practice what you preach” thing when it comes to Warmists and their pet cult for over a decade of blogging now, because few actually do more than make a few token changes in their own lives, yet, they want to force Everyone Else to make changes in their lives at the end of the government sword. And here we have something fun, via Just One Minute, where Tom Maguire notes that “words speak louder than actions so stop hating you haters”, as the New Republic’s Emily Atkin takes a shot at defending climahypocrisy

Al Gore’s Carbon Footprint Doesn’t Matter
Conservatives say environmentalists are hypocrites if they consume more energy than the average American. It’s a deceitful, disingenuous argument.

Al Gore is back in the spotlight with his new documentary, An Inconvenient Sequel, making him a top target again of the right-wing counter-intel complex. On Thursday, the conservative National Center for Public Policy Research released a report, “Al Gore’s Inconvenient Reality,” that paints the former vice president as a hypocritical climate advocate. In near-creepy detail, NCPPR author Drew Johnson maps Gore’s home in Nashville, Tennessee, down to the number of windows, and concludes that “Gore’s own home electricity use has hypocritically increased to more than 21 times the national average this past year with no sign of slowing down.” Johnson also slams Gore’s numerous attempts to modernize his home through energy efficiency, solar panels, and geothermal heating, saying they have been inadequate in offsetting his energy use.

Emily later notes that Gore isn’t the only Warmist who’s taken shots for being a climahypocrite. Interestingly, she inadvertently lays out the case that all these folks pushing anthropogenic climate change, are, in fact, hypocrites, before finally arriving at her actual argument

The claim that Gore and his ilk are hypocrites is a classic conservative attack strategy of redirection (because it ignores the core issue of climate change) and of poisoning the well (because it attempts to discredit the message by discrediting the messenger). This is much easier, and perhaps more rhetorically effective, than debunking climate science itself. That’s why you only see groups like the National Center for Public Policy Research releasing “studies” on Gore’s energy use. NCPPR, which has been funded by oil interests,

Isn’t that schtick about oil interests exactly what Emily just railed against, a redirection? Anyhow, it’s not up to Skeptics to debunk AGW (though that has been done many, many times, including by Warmists themselves, who trot out false studies, models that fail, etc), it’s up to Warmists to prove their hypothesis using the Scientific Method.

advocates against policies to fight global warming because it denies that global warming exists. “The world isn’t warming,” the group falsely claimed in a 2014 paper arguing against climate regulations. Thus, it’s in their interest to try to undermine one of the most effective advocates of aggressive climate action.

We don’t deny warming, we deny that it is mostly/solely caused by Mankind. But, this is all a deflectionary argument, moving on to

But the hypocrisy charge simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. An anti-abortion advocate who believes abortion is immoral and should be illegal, but gets one herself, is a hypocrite. But climate change advocates who don’t live a carbon-neutral lifestyle aren’t hypocrites because, for the most part, they’re not asking you to live a carbon-neutral lifestyle. They’re asking governments, utilities, energy companies, and large corporations to increase their use of renewable energy so that you can continue to live your life as you please, without contributing to global warming.

Um, if they’re asking others to practice what they preach while refusing to do the same, that would make them…..hypocrites! And, as Tom Maguire points out, they aren’t asking: they’re demanding that Government pass laws that force compliance.

But the most unfortunate aspect of this argument is how it misleads vulnerable populations. Rich people like Gore and DiCaprio and Obama won’t be affected by climate change.

Nor will they be affected by ‘climate change’ policies. They have enough money to avoid all the negatives of rising taxes, fees, energy and food costs, a general cost of living increase, and restrictive government policies. The middle and lower classes will, though.

Read: New Republic: Al Gore’s Massive Carbon Footprint Doesn’t Matter Or Something »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Heartache: Majority Support Trump’s Legal Immigration Plan

By William Teach August 9, 2017 – 8:40 am

Once again, Democrats are on the wrong side of history. On the bright side, this means some great business for the makers of Rolaids, Pepto Bismal, and other medicines for gastric issues. And aspirin and aspirin substitutes. And Prozac. Valium. Etc

Poll: Voters support Trump-backed immigration bill

Voters support most elements of President Donald Trump’s proposal to scale back legal immigration to the United States and change the criteria by which the U.S. admits immigrants, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll.

Trump last week announced support for a bill introduced by Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.) that would favor worker skills over family connections and reduce legal immigration by half.

In defending the bill, White House adviser Stephen Miller cited the popularity of provisions of the bill in public opinion polling and predicted a wave of popular support for a bill that’s been long stalled in the Senate.

And, how’d that turn out?

Majorities back limiting the number of refugees offered permanent residency (58 percent) and establishing a “points system” that would award points based on criteria such as education, English proficiency and prospective salary in the U.S. (60 percent).

Support for some of the other provisions in the bill isn’t as strong but still exceeds opposition. Forty-eight percent of voters support reducing the number of legal immigrants by half over the next decade, compared to 39 percent who oppose that. On what Miller called “unlimited family chain migration,” 45 percent support ending the ability for U.S. citizens and permanent residents to petition to get extended family members green cards, while 39 percent oppose ending that.

Furthermore, we see in the poll (legal immigration questions start on page 4, these next are on 6), 54% believe that professional or academic achievement should be a major factor. 57% say education should be a factor. 54% say need for government assistance should be a factor, meaning, we do not need to be bringing in people who immediately go on the public dole.

35% strongly support limiting the number of refugees offered permanent residency. Only 15% strongly oppose. 24% somewhat support, 16% somewhat oppose. And

As for English-language proficiency, 62 percent say it should be a factor in determining who should be allowed to immigrate legally.

That’s a dagger to the liberal heart, as they prefer bringing in people who aren’t able to communicate with the majority of people in the United States, but do understand general yard maintenance at liberal big-wig McMansions.

Interestingly, the poll samples women 53% to 47% (wait, did Politico assume gender?). And oversamples Democrats 36%, to 32% Independent and 32% Republican.

#Winning.

Read: Heartache: Majority Support Trump’s Legal Immigration Plan »

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Heartache: Majority Support Trump’s Legal Immigration Plan | Trackback URL

Washington Post Has Category 5 Meltdown Over Trump Staying Strong On North Korea

By William Teach August 9, 2017 – 8:12 am

Perhaps they’d prefer the pajama boy, mom jeans, coddling and bowing version one typically saw from Barack Obama when it came to threats from foreign nations. Or, perhaps they’d approve of signing a deal that would simply push North Korea’s nuclear ambitions off for 10 years while giving them oodles of cash and access to more by removing sanctions

Trump’s ‘fire and fury’ threat is a rhetorical grenade

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S unsettling threat Tuesday aimed at North Korea was reckless and unnecessary. In its bombast, it resembled nothing so much as Kim Jong Un’s regular denunciations of the United States, frantic and hyperbolic. Why would the president of the world’s most powerful nation want to descend to that level?

At an event at his New Jersey golf club, Mr. Trump declared, “North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.” To raise the specter of nuclear war — and to do so to ward off mere threats, at that — is to draw a red line in the most foolish and destabilizing manner.

Au contraire, drawing a red line against a nation using chemical weapons against its citizens, then backing off that red line while saying “I didn’t set the red line, the international community did”, then ignoring more uses of chemical weapons, and watching a nation turn into a hell hole, well, now, that seems to be “in the most foolish and destabilizing manner.” Good thing no one did that, eh?

Since nuclear bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki seven decades ago, they have not been used in combat. Still, the danger that they will be used again has never disappeared; the years since the end of World War II have been filled with false alarms and close calls, which could easily recur. The United States and Russia keep thousands of nuclear missiles on launch-ready alert, meaning they are ready to launch within minutes of a president giving the order. Adversaries know this. Mr. Trump’s threat of “fire and fury” may sound like hype to American ears, but the words could be heard quite differently by others, such as Mr. Kim, the belligerent leader of a nuclear North Korea. Mr. Trump’s language could easily be misunderstood — he didn’t say precisely what would lead to “fire and fury” except for North Korea’s “threats”— and the upshot could be miscalculation or, heaven forbid, the kind of accidental entry into conflict that has haunted the globe since the dawn of the atomic age.

So, instead of taking Nutjob Kim to task, the Washington Post Editorial Board…..Blaming Trump. Who’s surprised?

The U.S. nuclear arsenal is kept in harness for one purpose only: deterrence. The definition of deterrence is a credible threat of retaliation that would prevent an adversary from attacking. Credibility, the essence of deterrence, means the other side has to believe the threat is real.

I’m pretty sure Trump has put North Korea on notice that the threat is real when he talks about “fire and fury”. He won’t be responding to North Korean provocations by giving them a nuclear reactor.

North Korea’s steadily advancing nuclear weapons and missile programs are serious; The Post reported Tuesday that intelligence officials believe the Pyongyang regime has successfully miniaturized a nuclear warhead to fit on a missile, the next step in a weapons system that could hit the United States. Dealing with that will require patient pressure and skilled diplomacy, perhaps for years. Instead, Mr. Trump has strut into the arena with a jarring rhetorical grenade.

That’s what we’ve been doing for decades. Clinton tried his thing, and that didn’t work. Bush 43 tried engagement and sanctions. Nope. Obama tried to simply ignore the nutters along with sanctions, till that reared up even worse.

And, of course, the WP had to use a nasty looking photo of Trump. Because #Resist.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Has Category 5 Meltdown Over Trump Staying Strong On North Korea »

Posted in Journalistic Malpractice, Unhinged Tools | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

New Term: Climate Gentrification

By William Teach August 8, 2017 – 4:52 pm

Here’s a great way of combing hatred for Caucasians and ‘climate change’

BLACK MAG: ‘Climate Gentrification’ Could Price Black People Out Of Their Homes

Black activists in southern Florida worry man-made global warming will change the makeup of traditionally minority communities in the greater Miami area, according to a black online magazine.

The Root published the first in a three-part series on the way “race, climate and gentrification intersect and impact black communities in Miami.” The article reports how activists, like Paulette Richards, are trying to get residents of Liberty City worried about future sea level rise.

Funny how it seems to be A-OK for some folks to complain about other folks moving into their neighborhoods, but, it’s utterly unacceptable for Whites to complain about minorities moving into their neighborhoods. Hypocrisy. Interestingly, the minorities complaining about gentrification in the Miami area are seeing property values living conditions rise while crime go down.

Because of global warming “[h]igher ground becomes essential—and more valuable—as coastal communities in the United States battle chronic flooding as a result of rising sea levels,” The Root reported, quoting University of Miami professor George Eberli who said sea level is “about four millimeters per year or even a bit faster.”

“That means in six years, that’ll be about an inch higher in sea level,” Eberli said. “And in 60 years, 10 inches or in 70 years a foot higher. So it is pretty fast, even if it doesn’t seem like a lot per year.”

The Miami Beach data center hasn’t been operational since 1981. One would think it would be rather important to have actual data, would it not? It only showed 2.39mm. Vaca Key shows 3.63mm, but only back to 1971. The best, longest data point is Mayport, Florida, which shows 2.59mm per year, going all the way back to 1928. Key West shows 2.4mm, back to 1913. Entirely consistent with a low level warm period.

But, the facts do not matter, because this is just another case anti-white bigotry in our so-called post-racial world.

Read: New Term: Climate Gentrification »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Global Warming | Comments Off on New Term: Climate Gentrification | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 8, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is lots of cheese which comes from evil milk producing cows, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lid, with a post on yet another celeb who wants to restrict Everyone Else’s free speech.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Eating Cheese Is Sexist Against Female Cows Or Something

By William Teach August 8, 2017 – 10:30 am

This is real (via Twitchy)

https://twitter.com/bkerogers/status/894225518152822784

The original tweet from PETA is from August 4th, and leads to this article

As feminists, we’re working to put more women in office and in corner offices. We fight for equal pay, tax-free feminine hygiene products, an end to sexual harassment, funding for women’s sports, and streets safe enough for us to walk alone. We push for strong role models who don’t objectify women on television and in movies. We work to end sex trafficking, slavery, genital mutilation, and “honor killings.” We rail against sexism in all its many forms—except, perhaps, when it comes to what’s on our plates.

Can food really be sexist? Yes, when it’s the product of imprisonment, rape, reproductive control, kidnapping, and abuse.

Contrary to popular belief, female cows produce milk only when they’re pregnant or nursing. They make milk for the same reason that human women do: to feed their babies. Cows who are imprisoned on dairy farms are forcibly impregnated through artificial insemination again and again on rape racks. Rape racks. All for your milk, cheese, and yogurt.

I just have to wonder, did PETA just assume gender?

Help end violence, reproductive control, and rape of females of animal species who desperately need us to speak up for them. Try delicious plant-based milk, vegan cheese, and dairy-free yogurt. Our vegan mentors can answer your questions and help you leave sexism off your plate.

These people are mental. And should be perhaps concerned with their own record of killing animals.

Read: Eating Cheese Is Sexist Against Female Cows Or Something »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Gets Big Scoop On Unreleased Climate Report Which Predicts Total Doom

By William Teach August 8, 2017 – 8:35 am

This report reads more like a political document, rather than a scientific one

Government Report Finds Drastic Impact of Climate Change on U.S.

As Tom Maguire notes, the word drastic doesn’t actually appear in the report.

The average temperature in the United States has risen rapidly and drastically since 1980, and recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years, according to a sweeping federal climate change report awaiting approval by the Trump administration.

The draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies, which has not yet been made public, concludes that Americans are feeling the effects of climate change right now. It directly contradicts claims by President Trump and members of his cabinet who say that the human contribution to climate change is uncertain, and that the ability to predict the effects is limited.

It very much reads like the kind of apocalyptic report that would come from the Obama administration, right before he took a long fossil fueled trip to attend a fundraiser and play some golf on the West coast. Especially since it was written between December 15, 2016, and February 3, 2017.

More interestingly, despite the claim in the first paragraph, no actual temperature data is supplied in the article. I wonder why. Probably because the draft report claims the world has warmed a tiny 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit from 1865-2015. Which is rather the thing one would expect during a Holocene warm period. That’s why they’re called “warm periods.”

No mention of the multiple pauses during that time period, nor the long period of statistically insignificant warming for over 18 years starting around 1997. Nor that a goodly chunk of the last 1,500 years was a cool period.

The study examines every corner of the United States and finds that all of it was touched by climate change. The average annual temperature in the United States will continue to rise, the authors write, making recent record-setting years “relatively common” in the near future. It projects increases of 5.0 to 7.5 degrees Fahrenheit (2.8 to 4.8 degrees Celsius) by the late century, depending on the level of future emissions.

If you’re guessing that a goodly chunk of the report, and the NY Times article, focuses on doomy prognostications, you’d be correct. It predicts flooding and drought, more “extreme weather”, and all the other fun stuff that the Cult of Climastrology always predicts. And, of course, it blames it all on humanity.

It does fail to mention that the majority of the previous climate models have failed, so, it doesn’t tell us why we should believe this scareathon.

Read: NY Times Gets Big Scoop On Unreleased Climate Report Which Predicts Total Doom »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 54 Comments | Trackback URL

Wisconsin Is Latest State To Push Legislation That Cracks Down On Illegal Aliens And Those That Support Them

By William Teach August 8, 2017 – 8:11 am

Texas recently pass a law that cracks down on sanctuary cities and the people in charge who refuse to cooperate with federal agencies on illegal immigration. Now it’s Wisconsin’s turn

(WeAreGreenBay.com) The Wisconsin Assembly is pushing two bills that affect immigrants in the state.

Assembly Bill 190 requires police to hold people suspected of a crime for an additional 48 hours if they are believed to be in the country illegally.

That bill would also allow the attorney general, district attorneys and sheriffs to sue cities, towns or villages for not complying with immigration law.

Assembly Bill 127 allows Wisconsin residents to sue their local government if they think federal immigration policies are not being enforced.

Representative John Spiros of Marshfield is a firm supporter of the bill. He says the bills will only affect people suspected of committing a crime. Spiros says people’s immigration status would not be questioned for things like traffic violations or when asking for police assistance.

Hilariously, opponents are asking the immigrants who work on farms, who make up 80% of that workforce, to strike in response. Well, if they are unlawfully present in the United States, they should be rounded up and deported, and the business owners who did not do their due diligence to make sure their workers were lawfully eligible to work should be charged.

In fact, many states have passed laws cracking down on sanctuary jurisdictions, and many others are considering doing the same, while a few Democratic states have passed laws and resolutions protecting trespassing immigrants.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Wisconsin Is Latest State To Push Legislation That Cracks Down On Illegal Aliens And Those That Support Them »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Wisconsin Is Latest State To Push Legislation That Cracks Down On Illegal Aliens And Those That Support Them | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove