Rio Olympics Opens Up With A Slice Of ‘Climate Change’ Propaganda

By William Teach August 6, 2016 – 7:48 am

I wonder if anyone actually saw it between the innumerable commercials run by NBC

Anyhow

(Washington Examiner) The 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro commenced Friday night with an opening ceremony that made a global plea to reverse climate change and conserve the Earth’s resources.

It’s Brazil’s first time hosting the Olympics. In fact, it’s the first time any South American country has welcomed more than 200 nations’ athletes for the historic games.

The opening ceremonies’ planning committee put on a more earthy, funky and down-to-Earth experience than previous summertime host countries like London and Beijing. Part of that focus was calling on all nations to save the environment, an almost ironic plug considering the neglected state that parts of Rio are in despite the Amazon rainforest in Brazil.

Not mentioned during that portion were the the huge numbers of people who traveled to Rio for the games on fossil fueled planes. For athletes alone, they expected over 10,500. Then there are the people who are there as coaches. All the media. And the IOC expected over 480,00 to attend the games. What’s the carbon footprint of all that travel in fossil fueled vehicles, the food, the garbage, the concrete to build the venues, the electricity, etc?

But, hey, they have a video narrated by Judy Dench! You can see it at Mediaite, or this video of a TV.

https://twitter.com/Bennettruth/status/761735498310250496

And poo filled waterways. Can’t forget about them.

And then NBC probably went back to commercials. Which do not show the 3.6 million metric tonnes expected carbon footprint of the games.

Read: Rio Olympics Opens Up With A Slice Of ‘Climate Change’ Propaganda »

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

Woman Who Holds No Press Conferences Wants Press To “Hold Me Accountable”

By William Teach August 6, 2016 – 7:19 am

Alternate headline: “Woman who attempted to hide all her communication with a private, non-sanctioned email server wants press to hold her accountable.” We could surely discuss things like her foundation, as well.

(The Hill) Hillary Clinton fielded questions from a group of black and Latino journalists on Friday, insisting that immigration reform will be a top priority if she’s elected president.

But the Democratic nominee warned that action on comprehensive immigration reform would depend on her political capital — which she said would only be as strong as her electoral mandate.

“We are hoping the outcome of the election will send a clear message to our Republican friends that it’s time to stop standing in the way,” Clinton told the National Association of Black Journalists and National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

“I want you to hold me accountable, because the stakes are as high as they’ve ever been in our lifetime,” she told the gathering, before taking questions.

This is a woman who hasn’t had a press conference yet this year, though her people quibble with that, saying that fielding questions from a whopping two journalists serving as moderators at the above even counted as a press conference. Of course, she sorta takes questions, mostly from friendly journalists, here and there, and in one on one interviews with, again, mostly friendly journalists.

But, being held accountable? If she wanted to be held accountable, she’d step down as the Dem Party presidential candidate. She knows she did wrong. She tried to obfuscate and stall inquiries into her server and what happened in Benghazi. She lied to the families of those killed in Benghazi.

Nor will the majority of the media hold her accountable. Most are voting for her. They want her to be president. Even if the GOP had a decent candidate, they’d still be voting Hillary. They themselves worked hard to cover up the email server and what happened in Benghazi. Few even bother with investigating her foundation. They are in the bag.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Woman Who Holds No Press Conferences Wants Press To “Hold Me Accountable” »

Posted in Hillary Clinton, Wonky Media | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Uh Oh: Fewer Americans Doubt Climate Change Is Real

By William Teach August 5, 2016 – 6:00 pm

This is just so utterly horrible for Skeptics!!!!!!

Survey: Fewer Americans doubt climate change is real

A new survey finds that fewer Americans doubt that climate change is happening, but it continues to be a highly polarizing issue.

Here’s the associated graphic

Interestingly, the number who are unsure is at a high. But, say, what about the question asked?

This is the latest survey in the series of National Surveys on Energy and Environment conducted by Muhlenberg College and the University of Michigan. Researchers asked a random sample of 768 people, “Is there solid evidence that the average temperature on Earth has been getting warmer over the past four decades?“

Now, if I am asked that question, I would answer “yes, there is solid evidence.” Because there is. You had a big spike going from late 70’s through about 1996, then a huge El Nino spike, then essentially statistically insignificant warming since. But, the temps have still gone up hundreds to tenths of a degree.

Yet, this does not cover causation in the least. And that is what the debate is about: What has caused the warming.

Read: Uh Oh: Fewer Americans Doubt Climate Change Is Real »

Posted in Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 5, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible horrible carbon polluting concrete, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Vulgar Curmudgeon, with a post on Hillary trying to win over white working class men.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Suddenly, Warmists Are Very Concerned About The Dearth Of Landfalling Hurricanes

By William Teach August 5, 2016 – 10:30 am

This comes to us via one of the Washington Post’s hyper-Warmists, Jason Samenow

The U.S. coast is in an unprecedented hurricane drought — why this is terrifying

Hurricanes, large and small, have eluded U.S. shores for record lengths of time. As population and wealth along parts of the U.S. coast have exploded since the last stormy period, experts dread the potential damage and harm once the drought ends.

Three historically unprecedented droughts in landfalling U.S. hurricanes are presently active.

A major hurricane hasn’t hit the U.S. Gulf or East Coast in more than a decade. A major hurricane is one containing maximum sustained winds of at least 111 mph and classified as Category 3 or higher on the 1-5 Saffir-Simpson wind scale. The streak has reached 3,937 days, longer than any previous drought by nearly two years.

We also learn that Florida hasn’t seen a hurricane strike since Wilma. And

 

Even the entire Gulf of Mexico, and its sprawling coast from Florida to Texas, have been hurricane-free for almost three full years, the longest period since record-keeping began 165 years ago (in 1851). The last hurricane to traverse the Gulf waters was Ingrid, which made landfall in Mexico as a tropical storm, in September 2013.

But, hey, you know what this means?

A study published by the American Geophysical Union in 2015 said the lack of major hurricane landfalls boiled down to dumb luck rather than a particular weather pattern. “I don’t believe there is a major regime shift that’s protecting the U.S.,” said study lead author Timothy Hall from NASA.

Well, that’s one of the excuses. Luck. We’ve heard several others, including that this was being caused by man-induced climate change. And, of course

Adam Sobel, a climate scientist at Columbia University, cautions that the drought in no way invalidates global warming predictions or the expectation that storms will grow more intense in future decades. The “notion that the hurricane drought in the Atlantic has somehow disproved the consensus projections of climate science is wrong, because the drought is still a relatively short-term fluctuation in a single basin, while the projections are for long-term global trends,” he writes on his blog.

See? It’s coming! Even though they all predicted that the big 2005 season would be the new normal.

But, Samenow does have a point: many people will forget just how dangerous tropical systems are, and ignore the danger. It’s easy to say “people aren’t that dumb”, but, heck, even during normal season, there are always plenty of dum

Read: Suddenly, Warmists Are Very Concerned About The Dearth Of Landfalling Hurricanes »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: The Gadsden Flag Is Now Considered Racial Harassment By EEOC

By William Teach August 5, 2016 – 7:21 am

Do you want to wear a Gadsden Flag symbol to work? You know, the one with coiled rattlesnake bearing the logo “Don’t Treat On Me”? Well, you’re a raaaaacist, via Eugene Volokh

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, among its other functions, decides “hostile work environment” harassment claims brought against federal agencies. In doing so, it applies the same legal rules that courts apply to private employers, and that the EEOC follows in deciding whether to sue private employers. The EEOC has already ruled that coworkers’ wearing Confederate flag T-shirts can be punishable harassment (a decision that I think is incorrect); and, unsurprisingly, this is extending to other political speech as well. Here’s an excerpt from Shelton D. [pseudonym] v. Brennan, 2016 WL 3361228, decided by the EEOC two months ago:

I’ll leave it to you to hit the link for the excerpt of the ruling, and note a few things from Mr. Volokh

Instead, this is a case about the rules that all employers, public or private,must follow, on pain of massive legal liability. The harassment law rules (which, as I noted, are the same for private employers as for the federal government) are imposed by the government acting as sovereign — the area where the First Amendment should provide the most protection — not just the government acting as employer.

2. Nothing in the opinion suggests that the cap wearer said anything racist to Shelton D.; I’ve read many such EEOC decisions, and they generally list all the significant allegations of harassment. (I can’t access the specific complaint in the case, because all that information is kept secret in EEOC proceedings.) Shelton D.’s objection was apparently just to the wearing of the flag, and the ideology that he thinks has become associated with the flag. And the claim that the EEOC is allowing to go forward is simply that the cap, in some social or workplace “context” would be reasonably seen as conveying a racially offensive message.

He goes on to note that private employers would feel pressured to restrict this kind of thing under pain of lawsuit and government investigation. And he’s utterly correct. This could apply even to an employee vehicle in the parking lot, or if the hat was removed before entering the workplace. He further discusses people getting upset and complaining if someone has Trump/Pence gear, which would drive liberals nuts.

Really, most contentious stuff should be left out of the workplace, not due to government pressure, but in order to have a more unified, smoother running workplace. But, people are people, and will discuss things. It is interesting to note that it’s pretty much only liberals that will complain, though. Perhaps it’s time for Republicans to complain about all the Democrat material in the workplace. Think the EEOC will rule in favor of removing Black Lives Matter stuff, or Hillary for President?

Regardless, this ruling chills free speech, because companies will want to crack down on anything they see to avoid issues.

Read: Good News: The Gadsden Flag Is Now Considered Racial Harassment By EEOC »

Posted in Government | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Hannity Pre-Blames Everyone Else For If (When?) Trump Loses

By William Teach August 5, 2016 – 7:03 am

This presidential election should have been a slam dunk for the GOP. Democrats were intent on making damned sure that Hillary Clinton would be their nominee, and virtually any Republican could have beaten her handily. She’s a candidate with incredible negatives, and really doesn’t inspire much excitement. So, what do enough GOP voters do? They get Trump installed as the nominee because he was brash and loud, he was an outsider who told them what they wanted to hear. But, he seems to know less than the average political junkie on policy, and likes to make lots of unforced gaffes, and his negatives are as bad as Hillary’s. So, what’s a guy like Sean Hannity, who has fully embraced Trump, to do? I actually listened to this live

(Sean Hannity) GOP insiders are in full-on panic mode over Donald Trump after a rough week led to a dip in the polls for the Republican nominee. While we’re still several months from the November election, criticism from high ranking Republican is arguably making it more difficult for Trump to regain lost ground.

On Wednesday’s Sean Hannity Show, Sean explained that should Trump lose in November, high ranking Republicans will shoulder some of the blame for the defeat, as they’ve spent more time criticizing Trump than they have combating the policies of President Barack Obama or criticizing Democratic Nominee Hillary Clinton.

“If in 96 days Trump loses this election, I am pointing the finger directly at people like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham and John McCain and John Kasich and Ted Cruz if he won’t endorse – and Jeb Bush and everybody else that made promises they’re not keeping,” Sean said in the first hour of Wednesday’s show. “And because I have watched and witnessed to the point of incredible frustration – I have watched these Republicans be more harsh towards Donald Trump than they’ve ever been in standing up to Barack Obama and his radical agenda that had doubled the debt, that has resulted in a 51-year low in home ownership in this country, the percentage of homes that are owned by Americans, the lowest labor participation rate since the 70s and that has led to millions and millions of Americans in poverty and on food stamps and out of the labor force.”

Well, it could be that Trump doesn’t actually represent the Republican Party for real. Those folks mentioned represent a pretty wide smattering, from squishes to true American conservatives, and they do not care for Trump, who suddenly switched all his positions to GOP when he decided to run for president in 2011. This guy was pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-big government, pro-eminent domain for other private entity use, pro-taxation, and so much more.

And, I’ve tweeted to Sean many times, if someone slurred your wife and father, would you endorse them?

“They did nothing, nothing – all these phony votes to repeal and replace ObamaCare, show votes so they can go back and keep their power and get reelected,” he added. “Sorry, you created Donald Trump, all of you because of your ineffectiveness, because of your weakness, your spinelessness, your lack of vision, your inability to fight Obama. Your fear of being blamed for a government shutdown and I’m getting a little sick and tired of all of you. Honestly I am tempted to just say I don’t support any of you people ever. You know what, Paul Ryan wants to play this game – I haven’t made up my mind either. He’s running against a guy in the primary. I haven’t made up mind who I’m going to support.”

Sean says his support is just based on his promise that he would back whoever won. Seems a bit over the top to me. I’ve also tweeted in the past whether he would be so on-board and adamant if the nominee was named Lindsay Graham, Mitch McConnell, or Michael Bloomberg. Remember, Bloomberg had been a Republican. Does he really represent the GOP, other than his economic beliefs? No.

Funny thing, though, Hannity used to be a big fan of the votes to repeal Ocare, and explained that it was impossible without controlling the White House.

Right Scoop writes

The fact that Hannity is willing to blame Ted Cruz, among others, because he still thinks Cruz should have endorsed Trump, after all the lies and smears Trump threw at Cruz and his family in order to defeat him in the primary — well that tells us all we need to know about Hannity. He’s a lost cause and he’s delusional.

Trump is the reason he’s in this mess and if Trump loses in November, it’s all on Trump.

It’ll be on his supporters, as well. They picked Trump. At the end of the day, would a president Trump be better than Hillary? Maybe, maybe not. We really do not know. Let’s go back to something Neal Boortz said

The next president is going to be a disaster, an abject disaster, whether it’s Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

If it is Hillary Clinton, it will be their disaster, and you can sit there and point out what a disaster their president is and how we need to do something to recover from the disaster that is their president. If the disaster is Donald Trump, then you immediately have to start talking (if you do) about what a disaster our president, this guy we put into the White House is.

How are you then going to talk about the need for reform? How are you then going to talk about the need to return to more limited government, less government interference? How are you then going to talk about the need for big-time electoral change in the next election coming up in two years? How are you going to do that when you are the person who put the disaster in office in the first place?

It’s called the Hamilton Rule: “If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”

The only downside is how much damage Hillary can do in four years, especially with potential Supreme Court appointments, as well as lower courts. But, then, what damage could Trump do?

But, this is what’s going to happen when Trump loses. The blame will be cast to everyone else and to outside forces and what have you. But, not the candidate or the people who chose him.

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/761314935666253825

Likely not.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Hannity Pre-Blames Everyone Else For If (When?) Trump Loses »

Posted in Donald Trump | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Suddenly, Liberals Are Very Concerned Over Personal Records

By William Teach August 4, 2016 – 4:31 pm

The liberal media is Very Concerned about Melania Trump’s immigration records, because there are gaps that are raising questions

Gaps in Melania Trump’s immigration story raise questions
A racy photo shoot is prompting fresh scrutiny of the would-be first lady’s early visits to the United States.

See? Oh, and Politico throws in a bit of “slut shaming”, or at least, that is what it would be called if the target was not a Republican. You can see a wide array for Lefties who are also Very Concerned at the Memeorandum thread. And some are slut shaming, her, too.

Bloomberg calls her a Lucky Immigrant. Mememorandum has more liberals being Concerned.

And then we have Mother Jones

Melania Trump Could Clear Up Her New Immigration Controversy by Releasing Her Visa Records
Is Donald Trump married to a woman who violated US immigration law?

This is all interesting, because none of these lefties were particularly concerned with Hillary’s records, such as her 33,000 deleted emails. They did not want to know a thing about the rest of the emails that weren’t deleted. They were not interested in the story at all. Nor are they interested in the pay for play while she was Secretary of State. Many Bernie Sanders fans wanted her to release the transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street and other big money companies, but, among the majority of the media and Democrats? Not so much. There are lots of records Hillary needs to release. Last time I checked, Melania wasn’t running for President.

Read: Suddenly, Liberals Are Very Concerned Over Personal Records »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 36 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 4, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible waterpark wasting tons of non-renewable water which will disappear from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on who could possibly have predicted what is going on in the presidential race.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Bummer: Gulls Might Be Turning Cannibal Due To ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach August 4, 2016 – 10:02 am

The latest hyperventilating bit of insanity from the Cult of Climastrology

Climate Change Might Be Turning Gulls Into Cannibals

Jim Hayward slips on a hard hat and pops open an umbrella before stepping into a storm of angry gulls.
Hayward, a seabird biologist based on Protection Island in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, is making his evening rounds through the largest gull nesting colony in the Puget Sound region. He’s been monitoring this site since 1987, so he’s used to the shrieking, the dive-bombing, the frequent splatterings of gull poop, and the pecking at his head, hands and feet.

What he’s not accustomed to is the cannibalism. It’s hard to watch: A fluffy chick straying a few yards from its nest is suddenly snatched up by its neck. Another hungry gull swoops in and bites at the chick’s leg. The mother intervenes but is outnumbered. Her baby disappears under a frenzy of flapping and pecking.

Over the last decade, the gulls have shown a growing taste for their neighbors’ eggs and chicks. The trend appears linked to climate change.

“It doesn’t seem like a lot, but a one-tenth of a degree change in seawater temperature correlates to a 10 percent increase in (the odds of) cannibalism,” said Hayward, a professor at Andrews University in Michigan.

It couldn’t be anything other than humans driving fossil fueled vehicles. That is obviously the only answer. At least in Warmist World. It’s not scary enough to make Warmists give up their own use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral mind, you.

(Listverse) Gulls don’t respect species relationships and will not only eat other gull species, but engage in cannibalism from time to time—just because. Several species take young from a neighboring gull’s nest and eat them. In a bizarre (and exceptionally creepy) research project, an ornithologist noted a weekly pattern in one species’s cannibalism incidents. On Sundays, the carnage increased, and the gulls not only stole other chicks to consume, but occasionally fed on their own. It appears that human trawling cycles influence the availability of food, and on Sundays (without trawlers to follow) cannibalism becomes a more attractive choice.

Seagulls, like many birds, mammals, insects, sea life, and amphibians, basically life on earth, have long been known to engage in cannibalism. Among life forms, those that scavenge are much more likely to do this.

But, you know, ‘climate change.”

Read: Bummer: Gulls Might Be Turning Cannibal Due To ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove