Warmists Very Upset That Trump’s Team Is Chock Full Of Skeptics

Say, I wonder what the carbon footprint of the UK Guardian? Do they use a lot of fossil fuels to deliver their dead tree edition and to gather the news?

Trump’s transition: sceptics guide every agency dealing with climate change

The heads of Donald Trump’s transition teams for Nasa, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Energy, as well as his nominees to lead the EPA and the Department of the Interior, all question the science of human-caused climate change, in a signal of the president-elect’s determination to embark upon an aggressively pro-fossil fuels agenda.

Trump has assembled a transition team in which at least nine senior members deny basic scientific understanding that the planet is warming due to the burning of carbon and other human activity. These include the transition heads of all the key agencies responsible for either monitoring or dealing with climate change. None of these transition heads have any background in climate science.

Neither does Al Gore, Barack Obama, most of the elected Democrats who yammer on about this, nor, interestingly, the article writer, Oliver Milman. Huh.

Anyhow, if Warmists hate this, I applaud Trump.

The rest of the article is a long whine about these people.

Read: Warmists Very Upset That Trump’s Team Is Chock Full Of Skeptics »

Trump Contradicts “Settled Science” On Climate Change Or Something

The media members of the Cult of Climastrology are Outraged!

Contradicting settled science, Donald Trump says “nobody really knows” on climate change

Donald Trump said again on Sunday that he is “open-minded” about climate change — but also that “nobody really knows” the truth about the issue, which contradicts the fact that there is near-universal scientific agreement on the issue.

In an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” moderator Chris Wallace pointed out to Mr. Trump that in the space of a week he both met with former Vice President Al Gore and appointed Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, a climate change denier who has opposed many environmental regulations, to head the Environmental Protection Agency. Where, Wallace asked, does Mr. Trump stands on climate change?

“I’m very open-minded. I’m still open-minded,” he said. “Nobody really knows.”

However, there is a near-universal scientific consensus that climate change is a real phenomenon — despite continued opposition to the notion among primarily Republican politicians. NASA’s website on climate change, for example, notes that approximately 97 percent of publishing climate scientists agree that human activities are very likely responsible for rising temperatures.

I’ll mention again, the NASA webpage relies on the utterly discredited and debunked Cook at al paper, which relies on cherry picking a small number of Believer papers, with the vast majority, like in the upper 90% range, either taking no stance or not deeming that the current warm period is mostly/solely caused by human activity.

Is it settled science if 95% of the models are wrong? Is it settled science when they make a prognostication that fails to materialize? It was settled science that the world was flat, that the sun revolved around the Earth, that vaccines caused autism, that there would be a “population bomb,” Einstein’s static universe, Martian canals, the expanding Earth, and so much more. We’re told that some things are settled, then bamm!, people do more science and things change.

This whole thing just exposes how much the “science” of anthropogenic climate change revolves around everything but science. It’s a cult. It’s politics.

Read: Trump Contradicts “Settled Science” On Climate Change Or Something »

Democrats Are Wondering How They Win Back Rural America

This happens after virtually every election. The losers wonder why they lost, and they often do not come up with the proper reasons nor proposed actions. Trump thumped Hillary, and Democrats have been blowing it at the federal, state, and local levels. Nancy Pelosi and her cadre of old, mostly white coastal liberal elites refuse to acknowledge the reasons they lost, and are mostly making excuses. Russian influence seems to be their favorite, though, it’s highly doubtful that the people in the areas Democrats refer to as “flyover country”, which is an ugly term the way they use it (they also go with Jesusland and Dumbfuckistan), gave a damn about the Russians.

The Washington Post’s Dan Balz provides a great breakdown of the numbers in those Northern working class, suburban and rural areas that broke for Trump, worth the read, before diving into a discussion of what Dems need to do

Democrats search for a path back into rural America’s good graces

….

Democrats have sometimes assumed that they don’t need to do much to appeal to voters in these communities, assuming that they represent a shrinking portion of the electorate. Today they are wondering how they can appeal to them more effectively.

To some degree, yes. But, mostly because Democrats sneer at these people. They dismiss them. They call them names. But, they attended a symposium featuring Katherine Cramer, who spent a lot of time traveling throughout Wisconsin, and especially the small town areas, to write a book about how Scott Walker rose to power.

Not surprisingly, Cramer has been in high demand as journalists and others seek to better understand Trump’s success in appealing to voters in these parts of the country. During her presentation Friday, she was asked what Democrats could do to reach these voters. As the questioner put it: What could the Democrats do to speak to these voters more directly?

“I would say it’s not speaking to people,” she said. If Democrats want to do better with these voters, she said, it would require spending time with them and asking them what’s on their minds and then listening to their answers. Only then can they try to deliver a message. “There’s so much respect that has to be conveyed to people before they start listening to the message,” Cramer added.

Hillary blew off talking to these people. She preferred to talk to big money donors, mostly. Give Obama credit, he’s a great campaigner, and he traveled everywhere, talking to people not just in the big cities, but small communities as well. In between the big money fundraisers. Democrats mostly do not seem to care to listen. They despise these rural folks.

When another person asked why some people seem to vote against their own interests, Cramer again turned the question around. “I’m not claiming people are voting against their own interest,” she said. “We have to be careful about how we define what people’s interests are. . . . The trick is to think about what policies can you offer that people in those positions perceive as in their own interest.”

That’s a bigger smackdown from Cramer than it seems. Democrats think they Know Better than everyone else, so, if you aren’t voting Dem, well, you’re stupid and voting against you’re own interests. Dems do not listen, they lecture. They trot out all their Social Justice insanity, and economic policies that empower Government and hurt the small people and businesses. They want to increase taxes and the cost of living through various polices, such as their ‘climate change’ schtick. They want to make sure the transgenders can go into bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers with people’s daughters. They want to force nationalized healthcare on people. Think the folks in rurual/suburban America think those policies and beliefs are in their best interest?

For the Democrats, it’s a bigger challenge of trying to gain back a share of those voters, in part because they represented the margin of defeat in 2016. The party historically has stood for working people but has seen that connection eroded, if not shattered. As Cramer suggested, there will be no quick fixes for the Democrats on that question.

The Dems are the party of the coastal elites. The areas where the party big wigs make oodles of money while everyone else seems to suffer in economic despair and crime. Areas where they attempt to limit Constitutional Rights. And who have nothing but derision for anyone who doesn’t believe exactly the same. A few Democrats have stood up for change, such as Joe Manchin and Tim Ryan, but, the majority back the Party of Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Democrats Are Wondering How They Win Back Rural America »

Because You Drove A Fossil Fueled Vehicle, It Snowed In Tokyo For First Time In 54 Years

This is your fault. Especially the Warmists who refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral. It’s horrific!

Climate Change Causes First Tokyo November Snow in 54 Years

Climate change has caused many unusual weather occurrences around the globe. Tokyo for one is currently experiencing its first November snow in 54 years.

In a surprising turn of events, the Japan capital of Tokyo was treated to a snow show beginning in the month of November. This is due to an untimely drop in temperature. Because of the cold front, some public transport systems experienced a delay in the onset of the snow.

But, wait, it’s even worse than you think!

The first November snow after 54 years occurred more than a month in advance of the expected annual snowfall called the “hatsuyuki.” The last time it snowed in Tokyo was in 1962, but in a smaller quantity that did not even accumulate in huge number and are not visible on the ground. But this year’s snowfall on a November looks heavier than that of the 1962 occurrence.

Because of that, this current snowfall is said to be the first snow that has accumulated on Tokyo ground on a November since authorities started recording from 1875, according to BBC. The Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) already issued some warning to prepare the residents for snow-related incidents such as icy roads and the collapse of makeshift greenhouses.

We’re dooooooooomed! I blame you!

(Interestingly, those periods were actually times of cooling within the Modern Warm Period)

Read: Because You Drove A Fossil Fueled Vehicle, It Snowed In Tokyo For First Time In 54 Years »

If All You See..

…is carbon pollution created snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Right Scoop, with a post on super Trump guy Joe Walsh turning on Trump.

It’s snow week!

Read: If All You See.. »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Patriotic Pinup Pearl Frush

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in the Once And Future Nation of America. The sun is shining, frost is in the air, Christmas is almost here. This pinup is by Pearl Frush, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. A View From The Beach has some fake news from the Chesapeake
  2. Bizzy Blog notes that Hillary lost due to one word
  3. Chicks On the Right notes Canadian liberals not wanting women to be able to defend themselves
  4. Creeping Sharia covers sharia courts in Germany
  5. Diogenes’ Middle Finger highlights how progressivism isn’t very progressive
  6. Flopping Aces laughs at Hillary on fake news
  7. Jihad Watch notes another fake Islamophobia incident
  8. Legal Insurrection covers Dems bummed about that whole nuclear option thing
  9. Michelle Obama’s Mirror covers fake news, fake ID
  10. Moonbattery discusses the latest insane Microsoft ad
  11. Patterico’s Pontifications covers Trump’s 2 rules
  12. Powerline has more of that fake news stuff
  13. The Daley Gator features the media doing their thing again
  14. The First Street Journal covers abuse of freedom of speech
  15. And last, but not last, The Geller Report discusses Sharia law, rape, and violence

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

NY Times Wonders If It’s OK To Lie To Get Faith Based Insurance, Because Ocare Is Really Expensive And Failing

As usual, there are lots of fun opinion pieces at the highly leftist NY Times. The Editorial Board is whining about Trump using social media to reach directly to We The People. Frank Bruni is losing it over Trump taking a hard look at people to serve in his administration. Liberals in the comments are upset that Nicholas Kristoff has a problem with the close-mindedness on college campuses. And, finally, we get a Typical Liberal Complaint about the movie Moana.

That said, Hillary Rosner provides the hilarity, as she attempts to slam faith based insurance plans, and those who are religious, but, she unintentionally exposes just how bad Obamacare actually is

Should I Lie About My Beliefs to Get Health Insurance?

HERE’S an ethical dilemma. If you could save your family more than $8,000 next year simply by signing a statement affirming belief in principles you find repugnant, would you?

It sounds absurd. But in fact that’s the position I’m in this week, thanks to a loophole in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. My health insurance poses a financial hardship to my family. All I have to do to lower my yearly bills by thousands of dollars is use my John Hancock to denounce gay marriage and a woman’s right to control her reproductive destiny.

She spends a lot of time slamming what is known as the statement of standards for Altrua HealthShare, a non-health insurance health insurance (you read that right), even though it would save her $8400 a year. Here’s what it says

  • I believe in keeping my body clean with proper nutrition and consuming foods in moderation. I
    believe that the use of tobacco, illicit drugs, and excessive alcohol consumption is harmful to
    body and soul.
  • According to the word of God sexual relations outside the bond of marriage between a man
    and a woman are morally wrong.
  • I believe that abortion is wrong, except in special circumstances such as rape or serious injury
    to the mother, and then, only after careful consideration by all concerned.
  • I believe that I am obligated to provide and care for my family and that abuse of any kind, of a
    family member or anyone else is wrong.

Funny that she fails to mention the first and last ones. But, yes, according to the word of God, marriage is between a man and a woman. If she wants to control her reproductive destiny, how about practicing sex whereas she doesn’t get pregnant mistakenly? There are a wide range of methods, such as condoms and the Pill, to avoid this happening.

Anyhow, this is all meant to slam this type of religiosity and all those mean people. But, here’s where it gets funny

By Dec. 15, like many Americans, I need to choose a new health insurance plan for 2017. I am a freelance journalist and editor. My husband runs a small business that pays him a salary but no benefits. We are among the millions of Americans who, under the Affordable Care Act, buy individual insurance through an increasingly expensive and inadequate marketplace. Since the law went into effect, monthly premiums for my family of three have already more than doubled, from $450 a month to $930. (In Colorado, my home state, 2017 rates are on average 20 percent higher than they were in 2016; in some counties that number is 40 percent.) On top of that, high deductibles mean we pay for nearly everything ourselves. In 2016, between monthly premiums and out-of-pocket costs, we’ve spent roughly $20,000 on health care.

Our new plan, the fourth in four years, is being discontinued, so we must again seek new insurance. We don’t qualify for federal subsidies. I’ve got six months of 2015 insurance premiums accruing interest on a credit card, and a $4,200 bill for a four-hour emergency room visit sits menacingly on my desk. The number of insurers offering individual plans in Colorado, as in many other states, has dwindled; there are now only three companies — Anthem, Cigna and Kaiser — left in our ZIP code. (In 14 Colorado counties, there is only one provider offering plans.) Only one of our longtime doctors participates in any of these 2017 A.C.A.-plan networks.

She totally supports Ocare, as does her husband, but, admits that it’s passage has totally reduced her quality of life. Because it is terrible. Expensive. Hard to use. Failing.

She ultimately decided she couldn’t join a faith based health share, so, instead of $500 a month with a yearly $1000 deductible (and a requirement to treat medical professionals with respect), she went with a $1,200 a month plan (no mention of deductible), and will, surprise!, have to give up the O.B. practice she’d been using for a long, long time. The one she liked.

Roughly 625,000 people belonged to health sharing ministries as of September; that number is sure to rise as people like me balk at their diminishing options. As Republicans grapple with the Affordable Care Act, it would be wise for them to keep in mind that, like it or not, America is composed of people with different backgrounds, ethnicities and beliefs. The answer is not to repeal the law, which could result in more than 23 million Americans losing their coverage. The answer is to find solutions that allow all working families to find affordable health care that doesn’t demand choosing between their ethics and their ability to provide for their children.

Again, an attempt to slam people , she exposes that the name of the law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, is an utter misnomer and a lie. And why it should be repealed and replaced with something that works.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Wonders If It’s OK To Lie To Get Faith Based Insurance, Because Ocare Is Really Expensive And Failing »

Good News: D.C. Poster Cop For The Gender Confused Is A Pervert

In most situations, if an employee acted in this manner they would be terminated. And, potentially, the justice system would become involved and press charges

DC’s Transgender Cop Poster Child Turns Out To Be A Pervert

A transgender police officer in Washington, D.C., who has repeatedly been praised as a community role model has also quietly been reprimanded for improper sexually-tinged antics with underage police interns.

In a story published Thursday night, NBC4 News profiled Jessica Hawkins as a police officer who “helps build trust in [the] D.C. community” due to his work on an LGBT outreach unit. Hawkins, who previously went by Billy, is biologically male but identifies as a woman, and publicly transitioned two years ago.

Hawkins has been praised again and again in articles. But, see, there’s a wee bit of a problem

But a new report by local D.C. station Fox 5 shows another, more disturbing side of Hawkins that hasn’t appeared in profiles. According to the report, Hawkins has repeatedly landed in hot water because of his conduct around interns for D.C.’s police department.

“Sgt. Hawkins showed the interns a ‘homemade video of her having sex with 4 men while she was intoxicated,’” Fox’s report says. Another complain filed against Hawkins accused him of taking under-21 interns to an Arlington gay bar, where she helped them buy alcohol and laughed at one intern’s possession of a fake ID.

Hawkins has voluntarily shown inappropriate pictures to other interns, and doesn’t dispute the allegations against him, admitting that they are correct. The D.C. police are supposedly “investigating” this conduct through the disciplinary review division, yet, Hawkins is still on duty after being briefly suspended. This has been going on for over seven weeks.

If you took underage people to a bar and got them in, what would happen to you? As a police officer, he laughed at the fake ID used by one, instead of arresting that person. He’s further admitted to purchasing and drinking alcohol on duty and at the station. There are also charges of bias in her policing, giving preference to LGBT people.

What will the result be? Most likely, this will be whitewashed and swept quietly under the rug. This doesn’t mean that straight people can’t be perverts. They certainly can. But, here we see the double standards in dealing with the gender confused. Even if the D.C. police decide to crack down, they know that the Typical Activists will pitch a fit.

Read: Good News: D.C. Poster Cop For The Gender Confused Is A Pervert »

If All You See…

…is a world suffering from extreme rainfall from motor vehicle carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on Irony and whiny liberals.

Read: If All You See… »

Washington Post Aghast That Trump Picked Guy Who Doesn’t Follow “Settled Science”

With apoplectic editorials like this, Trump definitely picked the right guy to head the EPA

A man who rejects settled science on climate change should not lead the EPA

THE WEEK started with a hopeful sign for those concerned about climate change: Former vice president Al Gore met with Donald Trumpfor about 90 minutes on Monday, leading some to believe that the president-elect might be ready to accept facts and evidence. By the end of the week, however, Mr. Trump had selected Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Pruitt wrote this in National Review in May: “Global warming has inspired one of the major policy debates of our time. That debate is far from settled. Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged — in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress. It should not be silenced with threats of prosecution. Dissent is not a crime.”

Obviously, saying that people should be able to debate and continue doing science and dissent are major Thoughtcrimes and Wrongthink.

Dissent, indeed, is not a crime, and acknowledging the uncertainties in climate forecasts is reasonable. But rejecting or playing down the near-unanimous warnings of experts, which are based on decades of substantial and continually accumulating evidence and suggest vast implications for future generations, should disqualify a nominee from leading an expert agency charged with making science-based decisions. Among scientists there is virtually no dissent from the conclusion that human activity — the burning of fossil fuels, which releases heat-trapping gases that stay in the atmosphere — is leading to planetary warming, and that the coming changes pose severe risks.

That link? It goes to NASA, which then cites the utterly discredited Cook et al “consensus” “study.” If this is what the Warmists at the Washington Post want to cite as ‘consensus” on science, well, then, looks like they are utterly disqualified from discussing the subject.

But rejecting settled science strikes us as being in a different category. The Senate should probe Mr. Pruitt’s position on climate change. If he explicitly or implicitly rejects the scientific consensus, that would be justification to vote no. If, on the other hand, he acknowledges the risks facing the globe, lawmakers should ask what Mr. Pruitt would be prepared to do as the nation’s chief environmental officer to combat them.

When you read things like that, you should wonder what they’re hiding, and why they want to shut down scientific inquiry. And just how much like a cult this is.

Read: Washington Post Aghast That Trump Picked Guy Who Doesn’t Follow “Settled Science” »

Pirate's Cove