The Reality Of The “150,000 Penguins Killed By Climate Change” Story

By William Teach February 22, 2016 – 7:19 am

You may have recently read the breathless headlines regarding 150,000 penguins dying in Antarctica. What’s the reality?

(Daily Beast) Major news outlets ran with a widely mischaracterized study from Australian and New Zealand researchers in Commonwealth Bay, Antarctica, saying enough penguins to fill three Yankee Stadiums had been trapped by an iceberg and, unable to fend for themselves, died.

The Guardian issued a death notice, saying “150,000 Penguins Die After Giant Iceberg Renders Colony Landlocked.” Other news sources issuing death certificates included theDaily Mail, The Telegraph, and CNN.

Bit of a problem: The research paper doesn’t—and never did—say that. Some penguins may have died, because penguins aren’t immortal. Others probably just moved.

“Maybe these birds moved. Maybe they died. There’s multiple scenarios that could’ve happened here,” Dr. Michelle LaRue, a research ecologist at the University of Minnesota, told The Daily Beast. “But nowhere in the paper said there was death and destruction.”

LaRue would know. She did the initial census on the Adelie penguins two years prior to the study done by University of New South Wales researchers that came out early this month.

So, all the media hyperventilation was based on them failing to read the paper properly.

Grist.org, for example, wrote, “150,000 Penguins Have Disappeared in Antarctica. Thanks, Climate Change!”

“They likely have nothing to do with each other,” said LaRue. “This is an iceberg. It’s the thing I find commonly, doing work in the Antarctic. Certain outlets will make links when there aren’t any. It’s ridiculous.”

In other words, these things have happened before, and will happen again. Perhaps all the media outlets should have asked the people involved with the study. Na, that would have forced them to be honest in their thinly veiled opinion pieces which support Other People being forced to do something by government to stop ‘climate change’.

Read: The Reality Of The “150,000 Penguins Killed By Climate Change” Story »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Hillary: “Yeah, I Know There’s Voter Concern That I’m In It For Myself”

By William Teach February 22, 2016 – 7:01 am

This is surely the focus grouped message Hillary and her team came up with after the voting loss in New Hampshire and the very close vote in Nevada

(Washington Post) Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton acknowledged in an interview that aired Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” that she needs to prove she is driven not by selfish ambition but by a desire to improve voters’ lives.

“I understand that voters have questions,” the former secretary of state said in an interview that was taped late Saturday, after her victory in the Nevada caucuses. “I’m going to do my very best to answer those questions. I think there’s an underlying question that maybe is really in the back of people’s minds, and that is, you know, is she in it for us or is she in it for herself? I think that’s a question that people are trying to sort through, and I’m going to demonstrate that I’ve always been the same person fighting for the same values, fighting to make a real difference in people’s lives — long before I was ever in elected office, even before my husband was in the presidency. I know that I have to make my case.”

I have to wonder, what has she really done in her time in politics and before to show she’s fighting to make a difference in other people’s lives? Was it when she destroyed an underage rape victim? When she left our people to die in Benghazi? When she used an insecure home-brew server that exposed national security material to America’s enemies and put those programs and real people in danger? Used her position as Secretary of State to enrich herself, her family, and her foundation? What, exactly, has she done to make people’s lives better?

Really, if she hasn’t demonstrated that she’s not in it for herself at this point, how is it possible to convince people otherwise? Her 2008 run sure made it seem as if she was entitled to the position, and that hasn’t changed now.

Hillary’s comment was in response to a reader’s question read by Jake Tapper about her “trust” issues, because her being trustworthy polls poorly. She did little to address that question with her answer. She’s definitely in it for herself. Most who run for president surely have a big, big ego. Hillary’s problem is that she’s untrustworthy, has demonstrated this time and time again, and has little to show over her decades in the public eye as trying to help other people.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Hillary: “Yeah, I Know There’s Voter Concern That I’m In It For Myself” »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 21, 2016 – 1:47 pm

…are streetlights that should be only powered by solar panels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Gateway Pundit, with a post noting that that the Kalamazoo shooter self-identifies as a Progressive.

It’s Canadian hotties week!

PS: apparently the update to the post noting that the Gateway Pundit story was wrong and was pulled never saved.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 30 Comments | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach February 21, 2016 – 9:54 am

Happy Sunday! Another great day in the awesome nation of America. Sun is shining, birds are singing, I got a new fish tank. I think this pinup is by Al Buell, not quite sure, but, added a bit, as usual.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. DaTechGuy has a big, big post up about Twitter suspending Robert Stacy McCain
  2. The Other McCain says there was no reason given as to why Twitter suspended his Twitter account
  3. The People’s Cube has 4 reasons why Cruz is an enemy of the state
  4. Vlad Tepes covers a man arrested for wearing a pig hat in The Netherlands.
  5. Weasel Zippers covers an interesting judge who Obama blocked
  6. The Last Tradition discusses Hillary’s Achilles heal
  7. The Gateway Pundit has a flashback showing why Jeb Bush is now out
  8. The Daley Gator discusses why Progressives are now pushing segregation
  9. Raised On Hoecakes features Hillary lying for 13 straight minutes
  10. Political Clown Parade covers our rocket scientist in chief
  11. Pamela Geller has video of a Muslim explaining how women must dress
  12. Moonbattery covers Trump and gun rights
  13. Legal Insurrection discusses Twitter banning Conservatives
  14. Flopping Aces wonders if Americans have finally come to their senses
  15. And last, but not least, Fausta’s Blog covers another entitled feminist moonbat

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 »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

NY Daily News Laments Trump’s SC Win, Calls Him “Bloodthirsty”, Voters “Piggish”

By William Teach February 21, 2016 – 8:34 am

There are lots and lots of interesting articles regarding what happened in South Carolina, and Nevada, Saturday. We learned that Jeb! Bush has “suspended” his campaign. Hillary just barely beat out Sanders. And, that the NY Daily News is unhinged

That’s the headline graphic from the front page of the fishwrap. The headline within the article is a bit different

Donald Trump wins South Carolina Republican presidential primary

But, the story itself is a masterful piece of disgusting invective (bold mine)

The piggish voters of South Carolina gobbled up the slop that Donald Trump served up Saturday — handing the bloodthirsty billionaire his second straight Republican presidential primary win.

Trump’s victory in the Palmetto State follows the orange-hued mogul’s first-place finish in New Hampshire and capped a dizzying stretch in which he called rivals liars, tangled with Pope Francis, and retold a discredited story about a U.S. general shooting Muslims with bullets dipped in pigs’ blood.

Just another typical week in the life of the candidate who can drop one outrageous bombshell after another and not lose a drop of momentum.

“There’s nothing easy about running for president, I can tell you. It’s tough, it’s mean, it’s nasty, it’s vicious … it’s beautiful,” Trump said in his victory speech.

And, Trump supporters are fanatics for daring to chant “USA USA”

Some chanted “USA! USA!” The fanatics snacked on cheese and crudité, and sipped beers from plastic cups.

Sipping beer from a plastic cup? Love of the USA? How gauche!

Nihad Awad, the Council on American-Islamic Relations national executive director, said Saturday in a statement that Trump’s “inflammatory rhetoric has crossed the line from spreading hatred to inciting violence.”

But the hate-filled campaign speeches only endeared Trump to South Carolina voters.

Cruz, who topped Trump in the Iowa caucuses, said that his was “the only campaign that has beaten and can beat Donald Trump.”

Yeah, wouldn’t want to incite violence against people who are violent themselves and have no problem in blowing up women and children.

How dare those piggish South Carolina voters give Trump a win!

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Daily News Laments Trump’s SC Win, Calls Him “Bloodthirsty”, Voters “Piggish” »

Posted in GOP, Journalistic Malpractice | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 20, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to desert from Other People’s carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post wondering if Bernie Sanders is a Democratic Socialist or a hardcore Marxist.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Surprise: UN Links Hotcoldwetdry To Ebola And Zika

By William Teach February 20, 2016 – 10:55 am

Warmists linked Ebola to ‘climate change’ when the latest outbreak occurred. Because Ebola obviously only happens because someone drives a fossil fueled vehicle. And, with the rise of Zika, Warmists linked it in the same manner. Now comes the United Nations

(The Hill) The United Nations is urging action on climate change as a way to prevent the spread of diseases like Ebola and the Zika virus.

In a speech this week, the executive director of the UN’s Environment Programme (UNEP) said officials should take a more aggressive stance toward climate change, highlighting studies that show nearly a quarter of premature deaths around the world can be attributed to environmental problems.

“The spread of Zika, just as with Ebola, has sent a strong signal to the international community that there is a need for increased attention to the linkages between environment and health,” UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said on Thursday.

What this does is diminish the threat of diseases, putting them under the banner of the More Important Issue to them, ‘climate change.’ Instead of making the diseases the primary issue, they’re secondary to Hotcoldwetdry. Yes, diseases can spread more in certain ways due to a warmer climate. That doesn’t prove anthropogenic causation, or the need for draconian controls on our lives, nor massive taxation increasing our cost of living. Don’t forget, the Black Plague and the 75 million deaths happened during a cooling period.

Read: Surprise: UN Links Hotcoldwetdry To Ebola And Zika »

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

Washington Post Makes Case To Block Any Obama Supreme Court Nominee

By William Teach February 20, 2016 – 8:23 am

Linda Hirshman thinks she’s being wise in stating why the Court needs to go to the left, but unintentionally makes the case for the GOP Senate to refuse to consent to any Obama nominee

After 45 years of conservative rulings, here’s what a liberal Supreme Court would do

Nothing separated the odd couple of the Supreme Court — the late Justice Antonin Scalia and his best buddy, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — more than their visions of the Constitution they both loved. Scalia saw the Constitution as a “dead” document, limited to the meaning of the original words at the moment the ink was dry, a moment when white, propertied men ruled. Ginsburg’s Constitution, by contrast, is the expansive charter of an evolving society. She celebrates “the extension (through amendment, judicial interpretation, and practice) of constitutional rights and protections to once ignored or excluded people: to humans who were once held in bondage, to men without property, to the original inhabitants of the land that became the United States, and to women.”

In other words, a liberal Court will rule by feelings and beliefs, rather than law and the Constitution. One which will manufacture “rights” out of the air, giving some people more rights than others. Hirshman yammers on for a long time about “inclusiveness”, as well as building up unions, removing all rules regarding abortion, and other measures, but, if you read between the lines, what we see is about using the Supreme Court to massively increase the power of the Federal Government over our lives, over our Free Speech rights, our ability to protest, our ability to practice our religion. It’s essentially a screed against the 1st Amendment, and, I’m sure if she had more time, against the other 9 original Amendments. Remember, the Bill Of Rights was never about what rights were assigned to citizens: it was about limiting the power of the Federal Government, telling it what it could not do.

An evolving view would diminish those limits on the federal government, perhaps even removing them. Lord knows, the federal government has worked hard to do this for a long time. A fully activist, hardcore Progressive court would do immense damage, and Democrat supporters should remember the old adage “be careful what you wish for. You might get it”, meaning these same losses of freedom could bit you in the rear.

Read: Washington Post Makes Case To Block Any Obama Supreme Court Nominee »

Posted in Progressive Goals | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Daily Beast Lies About North Carolina Laws

By William Teach February 20, 2016 – 7:37 am

I’ve mentioned Vox Day’s book SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down The Thought Police, in which he lays out the rules for dealing with social justice warriors. The First Rule is that SJWs always lie. And, they do, especially since their peeps are gullible enough to fully believe those lies, and they’ll often tell them without proof, and in a manner that the causal reader will not question the lies. Here’s Jay Michelson at the Daily Beast telling a whopper

Voter Suppression Could Stop 1.3 Million from Voting in Swing States
Since the 2008 election, Republican-led state legislatures have passed a dizzying array of laws to keep Democratic groups from voting. Will they make Trump or Cruz president?

First off, let’s note that this screed is about setting the terms for a Democratic Party loss as being about cheating, much like Dems did heavily in 2004. They’ve pulled this to some degree ever since Bush won the election in 2000.

Thanks to new laws passed by Republicans, 1.28 million votes that were cast in the 2012 presidential election won’t be cast in 2016.

That’s because, of the 12 states considered up for grabs in 2016, four—Virginia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Ohio—have passed onerous new voter suppression laws, which disproportionately affect communities of color and other Democratic constituencies.

Democrats sure seem to have a low opinion of Black people, thinking they cannot obtain a proper ID like the White people in the Democratic party. Perhaps these lilly-white Dems think Blacks are just unable to follow the law, thinking them lawless. Dems are pretty racist.

Here comes the big whopper

For example, in North Carolina, the Republican-controlled legislature and Republican governor eliminated early voting days. In 2012, 900,000 voters cast their ballots during the early voting window. In 2016, that number will be zero.

It’s cleverly written to allow Michaelson to dissemble if he’s accused of lying (which I did on Twitter), another trait of SJWs, but, taken at face value, it is utterly wrong. Hence the reason why there is no link to back the assertion. Does Michaelson not think people can look this up on the Internet? He’s expecting that no one will bother, they’ll just read it, call NC racist, and move on.

Alas, it is all a lie. SB 589, which also provides other measures, such as the voter ID requirement, reduced early voting days from 17 to 10, similar to the number of early voting days in quite a few states. The Democratic hotbed of New York allows zero early voting days. Is NY engaged in voter suppression? How about Michigan, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware, all Dem hotbeds?

Also, despite the reduction in days, the change requires counties to “offer the same number of early voting hours in presidential elections as were available in 2012 and an equal number of early voting hours in midterm elections as were offered in 2010.” So, fewer days, but they’ll have more voting stations to make up for it.

How does that equate to zero? How does this mean that NC eliminated early voting? It’s written so Michaelson can say “Oh, I just meant they eliminated 7 voting days.” What will the casual reader think it means? That’s right, that NC did away with all early voting, and they’re supposed to believe that the NC GOP is raaaaacist. Especially when we get this in the next paragraph

In other words, banning early voting could keep this swing state in the Republican column this November.

It’s not banned. Not by a longshot. SJWs always lie.

Of course, we have to have some whining about voter ID

Thirty states require ID of some kind to vote and 15 states require the ID have a photo. But unlike most of those other states, Virginia is one of the twelve swing states that will probably determine the outcome of the presidential election.

Got that? Requiring voter ID is fine in the states that are locks for Democrats, and only matters in swing states. He ends his whiny screed with

In short, none of these laws prevent voter fraud. They prevent voting, mostly for Democrats. And thanks to new laws in four swing states, they might just prevent a Democrat from getting into the White House.

Is he saying that Democrats are too stupid, too incompetent to obtain a proper ID, something that is pretty much required for life in the US? Heck, here in NC one can obtain a free ID. Is that still too expensive for Democrats?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Daily Beast Lies About North Carolina Laws »

Posted in Election Fraud, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Fossil Fuels Using Democrats Want Investigation Into Oil Companies

By William Teach February 19, 2016 – 3:42 pm

The witch hunts and government intimidation continues

(LA Times) A Southern California congressman and two other representatives are calling for an investigation of Shell Oil over whether it deceived the public on climate change at the same time it was preparing its business operations for rising sea levels.

In a Feb. 17 letter to U.S. Atty. Gen. Loretta Lynch, the three members of Congress said growing evidence suggests there may have been “a conspiracy between Shell, Exxon Mobil and potentially other companies in the fossil fuel industry.”

U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) sent the letter along with Rep. Peter Welch of Vermont and Rep. Matt Cartwright of Pennsylvania, both Democrats.

Their letter cites an investigation published by the Los Angeles Times that reported that in 1989 Shell Oil announced it was redesigning a long-term, $3-billion natural gas platform in the North Sea to deal with rising sea levels from global warming. Despite this and other incidents, the congressmen noted, “Shell apparently decided to fund climate deniers.”

These Warmists, who use vast amounts of fossil fuels to travel in vehicles and airplanes, are simply attempting to intimidate privately owned corporations and the citizens who work for them because they do not like anyone hold a divergent opinion. I think the 1st Amendment gives elected officials the power to do this, if memory serves.

Read: Fossil Fuels Using Democrats Want Investigation Into Oil Companies »

Posted in Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove