Good News: CO2 From 150 Years Ago Dooms Us Thousands Of Years In The Future

By William Teach October 20, 2016 – 10:30 am

Shifting goal posts from the Cult of Climastrology, especially regarding sea rise, from “Scientific American”, which used to deal with science, not reading tea leaves and crystal balls

Exposed: The Climate Fallacy of 2100
If we do not plan, now, to limit carbon emissions beyond this century, we will foolishly raise the oceans dramatically for thousands of years

It’s shocking for me (Robert) to accept that my home could be wiped out by greatly rising seas. That’s because I live on a hill north of San Diego, 45 feet above sea level and more than a mile inland from the coast. Equally shocking to me (Dan) is that the current coastline of my beloved Mendocino County, California, could largely disappear, a place where I spend weekends with my daughters exploring rivers that run inland, deep into wine country. These inundations won’t happen this century, but that is little solace. At the rate the world is going, land so dear to our hearts could slip under the sea and stay there for thousands of years.

At the 20th Century rate of 8 inches of sea rise, it would take, what, 67 centuries to get to 45 feet? Scary stuff. Notice the shifting goal posts of doom at the end.

That hurts. Most of us believe our homes, our towns, our cities will be here for centuries and millennia to come. And why not? In Europe and across Asia millions of people live in cities that are thousands of years old. Indeed, inspired by European permanence, Robert’s family built garden walls from stone and fondly looked forward to passing on the land to hoped-for-grandchildren, and theirs, and so on.

They will be, because the warming, for one thing, won’t continue. The normal pattern is for a cool period sometime in the next few centuries.

That idea, however, now seems flawed to both of us writing this article. Strong, new research indicates that anyone or anything tens of feet above the sea today may one day face an unbeatable force, whether a country home near San Diego or a skyscraping condo in Miami. Although shorelines are forever evolving, these changes can be predicted directly, and are due to needlessly excessive carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from a relatively brief, recent period of time.

How has the public not been made clearly and painfully aware of this? Why does fierce debate over climate miss so glaring a threat? The misperception, the widespread disbelief and the fallacy are rooted in a grave error in our thinking about time.

Because people who yammer on about world ending doom hundreds, if not thousands, of years in the future that makes no scientific sense are generally ignored as utter quacks.

The many models that have projected scenarios about future climate change generally forecast only to the year 2100,

We could probably stop there. Once the computer models appear, you know you’re in for a major league ration of mule fritters

or at times merely to 2050. As a result, public discussions have been mostly about “X degrees of warming” or “Y feet of sea level rise” to the end of this century. We have accidentally but notably limited our thinking, causing us to miss striking impacts that arise beyond this limited and artificial, specific time horizon.

It is fair to say that citizens and politicians intend for Miami, and indeed the whole State of Florida, to exist well beyond 2100. Same for New York City, Boston, Washington D.C., London, Shanghai, Amsterdam, Mumbai and so on. Yet the same people discount staggering losses these places face beyond 2100. That’s wrong, and immoral too.

Immoral! If that’s the case, all Warmists should immediately stop using fossil fuels, in order to save a house 6,700 years in the future. It’s for the children.

They won’t. They’ll just shift their goal posts. Because the current ones keep failing.

Read: Good News: CO2 From 150 Years Ago Dooms Us Thousands Of Years In The Future »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Hillary: D.C. Just Wanted To Protect Toddlers From Guns With Their Super Restrictive Laws

By William Teach October 20, 2016 – 9:00 am

The Blaze’s Christian Datoc noticed this bit from the debate, calling it “nonsensical”

Hillary Clinton flip-flopped her way through answering a question on gun control during Wednesday night’s third and final presidential debate.

Clinton first told moderator Chris Wallace that while she is a strong believer in the Second Amendment, she also believes “there can be, and there must be reasonable regulation.”

“I want people who shouldn’t have guns not to be able to threaten you, kill you or members of your family,” she continued. “When I think about what we need to do, we have 33,000 people a year who die from guns. I think we need comprehensive background checks, we need to close the online loophole, close the gun show loophole.”

Any smart thinking person understands the fallacy of the 33,000 number. We already have pretty comprehensive background checks. The gun show loophole is a canard.

“There are other matters that I think are sensible that are the kind of reforms that would make a difference that are not in any way conflicting with the Second Amendment,” Clinton added. “You mentioned the [District of Columbia V.] Heller decision, and what I was saying that you referenced, Chris, was that I disagreed with the way the court applied the Second Amendment in that case.”

“What the District of Columbia was trying to do was protect toddlers from guns,” she elaborated. “They wanted people with guns to safely store them, and the court didn’t accept that reasonable regulation, but they’ve accepted many other, and I see no conflict between saving people’s lives and defending the Second Amendment.”

Got that? D.C. enacted draconian laws that heavily restricted law abiding citizens from purchasing guns to save toddlers, per a woman who has dozens of armed security personnel hanging around at all time, some carrying, at times, weapons that are illegal for most citizens to purchase and carry.

Like most Democrats, Hillary will spin her way from her real opinion on guns, which is to remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens. Don’t forget, she thought that Australian style gun control, ie, banning most and confiscation, is an idea worth looking into. She should lead the way, and disarm her protection.

Read: Hillary: D.C. Just Wanted To Protect Toddlers From Guns With Their Super Restrictive Laws »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Hillary Clinton | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Big Takeaway From 3rd Debate: Trump Hates Democracy Or Something

By William Teach October 20, 2016 – 8:25 am

Who watched the debate, raise your hand. OK, good. I watched for about the first 40 minutes, before I realized that game 4 of the Dodgers-Cubs was on, and never really went back to the debate. Trump started strong, but, really missed some big opportunities to hit back at Hillary with facts that matter. He really whiffed early on when the questions turned to the economy. Then there was this, which has sent the NY Times editorial board into apoplexy (not that they need much impetus when they’re writing about a Republican. It’s what they do)

Donald Trump’s Contempt for Democracy

Donald Trump turned, in the third and final presidential debate, from insulting the intelligence of the American voter to insulting American democracy itself. He falsely insisted there were “millions of people” registered to participate in the election who did not have the right to vote and declared he would not commit to honoring the outcome.

Dead people voting in Chicago and illegal aliens were very upset by Trump’s comments.

Hillary Clinton was clearly shocked that he was attacking the very foundation of the republic, the American tradition of peacefully transferring power. “That’s horrifying,” she said, rightly. At one point, Mr. Trump even said, outrageously, “She shouldn’t be allowed to run.”

She should be in front of jury, if not in jail. The fix was in, and almost anyone else would have been prosecuted.

Mr. Trump arrived at the debate in Las Vegas after days of making venomous attacks on the democratic process, and by implication, the voters’ ability to make sound choices. Asked about whether he would accept the election result, he tersely answered, “I will look at it at the time.” In rejecting his answer, Mrs. Clinton noted that Mr. Trump is a chronic complainer when he loses, even in an Emmy award competition. But applying his loser’s lament to an American presidential election is a far different proposition than whining about a TV show. “He is talking down our democracy,” Mrs. Clinton warned.

Oh, noes, he might not accept the results!!!!!! Here’s what he actually said, via the transcript

Trump: I will look at it at the time. I’m not looking at anything now, I’ll look at it at the time. What I’ve seen, what I’ve seen, is so bad. First of all, the media is so dishonest and so corrupt and the pile on is so amazing. “The New York Times” actually wrote an article about it, but they don’t even care. It is so dishonest, and they have poisoned the minds of the voters. But unfortunately for them, I think the voters are seeing through it. I think they’re going to see through it, we’ll find out on November 8th, but I think they’re going to see through it. If you look —

That keeps going for a bit, winding through the things the NYTEB complains about and spins a bit. Just search “horrifying” in the transcript, and it starts a bit up the page. Because this is not the point. Many Republicans are rightly raising what Al Gore did in 2000. And they’re correct.

Al Gore and his people refused to accept the results of Florida 2000. Even though 27 of the 28 voting precints with issues were run by Democrats, they kept pushing and pushing, taking it too court, trying to circumvent the law. And the media did not want the illegal recounts to end. They wanted Gore. Gore never has fully accepted the loss, nor have so many Democrats. They’re still writing articles about it. They’re still saying that the election was stolen. They same the same about Ohio 2004.

And going into the 2004 elections, Democrats were talking about not accepting the results if Bush won. Wait, wait, let me write the name like Democrats: B*sh. Or B***. Or even ****. They also like the pResident. And Occupier in Chief. Everything was about having George Bush as the illegal resident of the White House (along with utter Bush Derangement Syndrome). They talked about not accepting the decision if McCain won in 2008.

Hillary and her team didn’t want to accept the results of the 2008 Democratic Primary, and, instead, fought right to the end, when they were demanding a floor count. They were complaining about massive voter fraud during the primary, mostly from Team Obama.

This is politics, folks. It’s a dirty, nasty business. All sides engage in shenanigans, and claim the other side engages in shenanigans.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Big Takeaway From 3rd Debate: Trump Hates Democracy Or Something »

Posted in Donald Trump, Journalistic Malpractice | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Your Halloween Candy Could Be Killing Orangutans

By William Teach October 19, 2016 – 3:32 pm

Notice that the headline didn’t include my typical, “Or Something”

(Huffington Post Green) Halloween is fast approaching and you know what that means: candy, candy, candy— and some chocolate bars, too.

But you might want to think twice before biting into a tasty treat. Some sweets are harmful to our planet and helping to kill off the critically endangered orangutan.

This Halloween, zoos and conservation groups across the country are encouraging consumers to choose confectionary made from sustainable palm oil or no palm oil at all.

You might think this is typical enviroweenie talk, but, I’ve discussed palm oil before. Rain forests and jungles and such are being destroyed through much of the world, particularly in Asia and the western Pacific, which has created a huge habitat loss, with those creating the palm oil farms even going as far as paying poachers to kill the animals, including orangutans.

Skyrocketing demand for palm oil has come at a steep cost to the Earth. The equivalent of 300 football fields of rainforest is destroyed every hour to make way for palm oil plantations, according to the World Wide Fund for Nature. This deforestation has decimated the populations of many vulnerable creatures, including the orangutan, Sumatran tiger and Sumatran elephant. And it’s contributed in no small way to climate change.

Interestingly, some of the skyrocketing usage of palm oil is to create replacement fuels for gasoline. It’s not just candy and cookies and foods.

There are also lots of human rights issues and other environmental issues involved, as well. I’ve leave it up to you to read the article in full, noting that many candy and food companies have stated they will either not use palm oil or only use sustainable (in other words, where the environment is not being destroyed and animals no slaughtered), and end with

Colorado’s Cheyenne Mountain Zoo has created a free sustainable palm oil shopping guide app, aimed at helping consumers find products made by companies that are members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil.

There are things that we all, as consumers, can do to protect the environment. You don’t have to be a believer in anthropogenic climate change, just a lover of the environment.

Read: Your Halloween Candy Could Be Killing Orangutans »

Posted in Environment | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 19, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a forest turning to desert from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on ecoterrorists.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Are Very Upset That ‘Climate Change’ Is Missing From The Debates

By William Teach October 19, 2016 – 10:30 am

Seriously, why wouldn’t Hillary and Trump debate a subject that continuously ranks last or next to last on the lists of American concerns?

(Guardian) Climate change has been the elephant in the room during the past two US presidential debates. Ignoring this issue would be more understandable if this metaphorical pachyderm wasn’t about to rampage the lives of Americans, causing upheaval on a scale not seen since the start of human civilization.

“I’ve been shocked at the lack of questions on climate change, it really is fiddling while the world burns,” said Kerry Emanuel, a leading climate scientist. “This is the great issue of our time and we are skirting around it. I’m just baffled by it.”

The great issue!!!!!! That no one really cares about. And so great that Warmists refuse to practice what they preach in their own lives.

(Boston Globe) Unless Wednesday’s presidential debate moderator Chris Wallace changes his mind, the three presidential debates will add up to four-and-a-half hours without one question from the moderators about climate change. That would be an utter embarrassment to the American political process, a fitting final demonstration of how gutter politics have ignored an issue that affects every person in the United States, and the world.

Instead, Wallace has chosen these topics: debt and entitlements, immigration, the economy, the Supreme Court, foreign hot spots, and the candidates’ fitness to be president. All of these are important, but climate change has massive tentacles in all of them, a critical area for candidates to demonstrate their fitness to occupy the White House.

Got that? ‘Climate change’ is everything!!!!!

(Pittsburgh Post Gazette) However, there is one crucially important issue that has not even been raised by the moderators. That is the question about what the candidates plan to do to deal with the changing climate. They need to be asked: “What is your plan to deal with climate change and how do you plan to convert to green energy?” This is a question that needs to be answered effectively to assure a reasonable future for our country and for our planet.

Donald Trump: “well, I plan to ban the use of trees to produce newspapers and require all news organizations that are Believers to only use solar and wind to power their Internet productions.” Now, that would be funny.

There are lots and lots of articles and opinion pieces scattered around in just the last 24 hours, all taking the same line while failing to provide any scientific evidence (note for Warmists: correlation is not causation) that the current warming is caused mostly or solely by Mankind. We’ll wrap up with the Huffington Post, which has three questions that should be asked, pre-ordaining that Hotcoldwetdry is real

Chris, please ask these three important questions:

First, super storms such as Hurricane Matthew or severe flooding and widespread wildfires in the western U.S. will almost certainly become stronger, more frequent, and more destructive as the climate change accelerates. What policies do you support to address current and future devastation to communities across the U.S. caused by climate change-enhanced weather emergencies?

Of course, the previous prognostications have failed to come to fruition, as it did not make U.S. landfall as a major hurricane, continuing the drought, the longest on record for the U.S.

Next, the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change recently reached the threshold to enter into force, well ahead of schedule. The Agreement, which the U.S. formally joined in September, requires that signatories collectively develop domestic programs to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will stabilize global warming. How do you propose we achieve this international obligation?

The U.S. didn’t formally join it, since it wasn’t ratified by the U.S. Senate, as required by our Constitution. Obama joined it. Let him give up his own giant carbon footprint. If Trump wasn’t losing badly, he could simply cancel our involvement with a few words on a piece of paper.

Finally, according to estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, rising sea levels in the coming decades will have disastrous effects on low-lying coastal countries and small island states such as Bangladesh, Kiribati, and Tuvalu. What duty does the U.S. owe to vulnerable communities around the world already suffering from the effects of climate change, and those who will suffer greater destruction in the future?

None, because sea rise is entirely normal during the Holocene, it is not accelerating, and it is actually below what should be seen during a Holocence warm period. And why is everything in the future? Why does each prognostication of doom fail to materialize, forcing Warmists to come up with new prognostications of future doom? Could it be that their models are wrong? Could it be that this is simply a political movement, not a scientific one? Of course it is a political movement.

Warmists had their shot to ask questions during the previous debates, run by hardcore Believers. They’ve mostly ignored the issue during the previous election cycles. Why? Because no one really cares.

Read: Warmists Are Very Upset That ‘Climate Change’ Is Missing From The Debates »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Woman Who’s Life Is A Fraud Says Republicans Created The “Rigged Election” Myth

By William Teach October 19, 2016 – 8:14 am

This is cute. Senator Elizabeth Warren, who spent her life getting all sorts of perks by claiming to have Native American heritage falsely, now has a funny opinion piece in the Washington Post

Elizabeth Warren: Trump didn’t invent the ‘rigged election’ myth. Republicans did.

Cratering in the polls, besieged by sexual assault allegations and drowning in his own disgusting rhetoric, Donald Trump has been reduced to hollering that November’s election is “rigged” against him. His proof? It looks like he’s going to lose.

Senior Republican leaders are scrambling to distance themselves from this dangerous claim. But Trump’s argument didn’t spring from nowhere. It’s just one more symptom of a long-running effort by Republicans to delegitimize Democratic voters, appointees and leaders. For years, this disease has infected our politics. It cannot be cured until Republican leaders rethink their approach to modern politics.

For years, Republican leaders have pushed the lie that voter fraud is a huge issue. In such states as Kansas and North Carolina , and across the airwaves of right-wing talk radio and Fox News, Republican voters have been fed exaggerated and imagined stories about fraud. Interestingly, all that fraud seems to plague only urban neighborhoods, minority communities, college campuses and other places where large numbers of people might vote for Democrats. The purpose of this manufactured hysteria is obvious: to delegitimize Democratic voters and justify Republican efforts to suppress their votes.

Obviously, Fauxahontas goes on to complain about voter ID, further repeating the Democratic line that Black people are either too stupid or too incompetent to be able to acquire proper ID. The whines go on and on, while she conveniently forgets about the voter intimidation from the Democratic Party supporting New Black Panthers and Occupy Wall Street, among others. We have photos and video of the New Black Panthers standing with clubs in their hands, and Obama’s DOJ shut down the investigation.

She wraps up her whiny screed with

Democrats and Republicans disagree about a lot of issues. We both fight hard to win elections. But winning isn’t everything. Al Gore understood that when he stood down after the 2000 election. Now Republican leaders seem increasingly concerned that when Trump loses, he won’t follow that example. But Trump’s words and deeds are merely the latest — and loudest — examples in a long line of Republican tactics that are poisoning our political system.

Now that’s funny. Democrats have whined about Florida 2000 ever since as the election being stolen. Gore has whine about it. He didn’t stand down: he was forced to stand down by that pesky thing called The Law. Liberals have accused the Supreme Court of rigging that election.

This sent Democrats, in their utter Bush Derangement Syndrome, in apoplexy, and had them yammering on that they knew the 2004 election would be rigged. They went on and on about Diebold voting machines being rigged before the election, and they yammered on about them post election. Years later they were still saying that the election was rigged/stolen for a variety of reasons. They complained about it being rigged/stolen due to exit polls differing from actual vote counts. And it wasn’t just the same old liberal base nutters: you had people like Rep. Dennis Kucinich claiming the election was stolen/rigged. Jesse Jackson. And many others, including the loser, Senator John Kerry, who whined about it years later.

And Democrats continued on with their complaints for the 2006 midterms and 2008 elections.

Elizabeth Warren is simply repeating the Democrat talking points about election rigging, that Republicans are trying to suppress minority turnout and stuff, because, in Democrat World, minorities need to be treated like children who cannot do anything without the helpful hand of Big Daddy Government.

Read: Woman Who’s Life Is A Fraud Says Republicans Created The “Rigged Election” Myth »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 42 Comments | Trackback URL

Too Good To Check: National Enquirer Releases “Stunning Revelations” From Hillary’s Fixer

By William Teach October 19, 2016 – 7:47 am

As John Hinderaker notes, the National Enquirer was utterly correct when it came to John Edwards, his mistress, and his love child. And the national media had to be dragged kicking and screaming, doing their best Three Monkeys impression, to even mention the scandal when people started to notice that the story could be for real. Of course, really, how many other National Enquirer stories turn out to be true, beyond a tiny kernel in a big bucket of popcorn?

Hillary Fixer Breaks Ranks: I Arranged Sex Trysts For Her — With Men & WOMEN
Stunning revelations of Clinton bag man!

(Starts out with a story about how the fixer arranged for Hillary to slip out for a tryst with a woman, moving on to)

Hillary’s former bagman finally confessed to The ENQUIRER just how he helped her to cover up her affair with married lover VinceFoster, too!

The shadowy figure — who provided PROOF of his employment for the Clintons — also revealed 12 fixes he covered-up, including:

+ How Hillary secretly plotted to a counter-attack on Bill’s mistress Monica Lewinsky — via a document buried for two decades!

+ What crooked reporters were on the take from the Clinton camp!

+ How he covered up Bill’s seedy romp with hookers!

+ Which A-list celebrity had a secret affair with Bill during his presidency!

In the bombshell exposé, The ENQUIRER will reveal the fixer’s dossier of smoking gun proof, including 24-years of documents, notes, and journals.

Of course, to find this all out you have to purchase this edition.

Double of course, this will make zero difference, no matter how much the Drudge Report and Trumpistas push it. Everyone already knows the Clintons are sleazy. Everyone already knows that media reporters are covering for Hillary and Bill. No need to pay them. So, even if this was all true, it would mean nothing, except a way for Trump to bash back, and, with less than 20 days left to election day, it’s meaningless.

Let me ask, though: if this was about Trump, would the media take an interest in investigating?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Too Good To Check: National Enquirer Releases “Stunning Revelations” From Hillary’s Fixer »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Climate Change Could Lead To Longer Patio Season

By William Teach October 18, 2016 – 5:15 pm

Somehow, this is a Bad Thing

Climate change, economics could lead to longer patio season

Kingston’s sidewalk patios are set to close for the season at the end of October, but the city may soon allow them to remain open year-round.

Councillors voted unanimously on a motion instructing staff to review the current patio bylaw with an eye to extending the season.

The current bylaw gives patios a seven-month window to open on municipal property – from April 1 to October 31 – but councillors say that may be long enough. They cite climate change and economics as factors that need to be considered.

“While often we find big large strategies to invest in our downtown we also have to pay attention to the details like this to ensure that we have a healthy vibrant downtown,” said Coun. Richard Allen, who introduced the motion to a warm reception October 4.

In other words, they see extra revenue in the proposal, so are using ‘climate change’ as a rationale. Anyhow, what’s wrong with a longer patio season?

BTW, this is Kingston, Canada, located at the upper north east of Lake Ontario.

Read: Bummer: Climate Change Could Lead To Longer Patio Season »

Posted in Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 18, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a field that has been flooded from extreme weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on the Pentagon issuing a transsexual handbook.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove