Kerry Claims Climate Deal Will Transform Economy

By William Teach December 14, 2015 – 7:39 am

He thinks that this non-binding, voluntary agreement which has no force of law, which will never be submitted by Mr. Obama to the US Congress, and will be ignored by nations like China and India, among others, will Do Something magical

(USA Today) Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday the historic Paris accord aimed at reducing greenhouse gases to slow global warming will transform world economies by encouraging corporations to invest trillions of dollars on clean energy over the next three to four decades.

It “sends a very powerful message to the global marketplace,” Kerry said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “There are jobs to be created, money to be made.”

It does send a very powerful message. It says “these people are economic fools. If this green power thing was working so well, companies would be charging ahead and making money, rather than going bust even with government subsidies.

“The result will be a very clear signal to the marketplace of the world that people are moving into low-carbon, no-carbon, alternative, renewable energy, and I think it’s going to create millions of jobs, enormous investments into R&D, and that R&D is going to create the solutions — not government,” Kerry said on ABC’s This Week With George Stephanopoulos.

In order to create the economy would required eliminating 96% of the CO2 emissions starting now

As we explain in a MasterResource.org analysis, there is a strong positive relationship between GDP and carbon-based energy consumption. Slashing fossil energy use that far would thus require decimating economic growth, job creation and preservation, and average per-person incomes. In fact, average world per capita GDP would plummet from a projected $30,600 in 2050 to a miserable $1,200 per year.

Average per capita GDP in 2050 would be less than what Americans had in 1830! Many futuristic technologies would still exist, but only wealthy families and ruling elites could afford them.

That would be catastrophic for jobs, health and welfare in developed countries – and lethal to millions in poor nations, who would be denied the blessings of electricity and fossil fuels for decades to come. That is indefensible, inhumane and immoral. And for what?

The use of carbon based energy supports $70 trillion in global GDP. Yes, it will eventually be replaced with some sort of clean tech. There will eventually be breakthroughs. When will they come? That’s the question. But, it’s nice being lectured by a guy who uses vast amounts of fossil fuels about the need for a low-carbon no-carbon economy, and has failed to notice that the push for “green” energy over the course of this century has created poor economic situations. Well, except for the wood industry, which is making lots of money selling wood pellets to people in Europe who need an inexpensive form of heating, thanks to foolish “green” policies.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Kerry Claims Climate Deal Will Transform Economy »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Economy | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

People Who Use Vast Amounts Of Fossil Fuels Say Fossil Fuels Are Coming To An End

By William Teach December 13, 2015 – 4:09 pm

Warmists are so cute when they’re in Hysterical Mode

This is the end of fossil fuels

For Selina Leem, an 18-year-old from a tiny part of the Marshall Islands in the middle of the Pacific, the adoption of Saturday’s “Paris Agreement” on climate change wasn’t about wonky diplomacy. It was about the survival of her country.

“This agreement is for those of us whose identity, whose culture, whose ancestors, whose whole being is bound to their lands,” she said in the final meeting of the COP21 summit of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“This agreement should be … a turning point for all of us.”

Huh. How many gallons of fossil fuels where used for a flight to and back to the Marshall Islands? Oh, and there are around 30 airstrips in the Marshall Islands. Seems as if they’re not too concerned with the use of fossil fuels.

The Paris Agreement, which came out of two weeks often-sleepless negotiations at a conference center here in a Paris suburb, is just the type of blaring signal the world needs that the era of fossil fuels is coming to a rapid close. Countries around the world pledged to do the near-impossible — limit warming “well below” 2 degrees, and below 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels if feasible. That basically requires the world to move rapidly toward 100% clean energy, producing zero net greenhouse gas emissions between about 2050 and 2080.

Good luck with that. If even Warmists refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels (witness the massive use of fossil fuels for not just the Paris COP, but the previous ones, and the ones to come), why should the rest of us? Yes, eventually we will, and should, replace fossil fuels with clean energy, and, by clean, I’m not referring to CO2 output, but actual environmental damage. Look at China: the problem is not CO2, but nasty and dangerous smog from coal plants, poor emissions standards on vehicles, and other things. CO2 is the last thing they should be concerned about. This is one of the things that annoys me to no end about Warmists: they focus on CO2, rather than real environmental concerns.

Fossil fuels will be around until someone comes up with a big breakthrough to replace them.

This is the moment the world dedicated itself to a liveable, clean-energy future.

But it’s going to take all of our efforts to actually make that dream a reality.

OK, time to pony up, Believers in anthropogenic climate change: stop using fossil fuels in your own life. Clean energy only. Will you pledge to do this?

Read: People Who Use Vast Amounts Of Fossil Fuels Say Fossil Fuels Are Coming To An End »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Energy, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 13, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle that should be replaced, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Independent Sentinel, with a post on yet another peace loving illegal. Who’s also Muslim.

It’s big fossil fuels sucking truck week, in honor of the #ParisAgreement. I’d love to know how they will replace massive fire trucks using fossil fuels with electric engines. Maybe in the far future with a big, big breakthrough.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach December 13, 2015 – 9:19 am

Happy Sunday! Another great day in America. The sun is shining, ducks are quacking, Christmas is almost here. Not sure who did this pinup, cannot read the signature.

What’s happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Independent Sentinel highlights how crazy the UK immigrant problem is
  2. Weasel Zippers notes moonbats getting the vapors over cookies
  3. Theodore’s World covers how the White House can’t say how gun control would have stopped any shooter
  4. The Lonely Conservative notes the best thing she’s heard all week
  5. The Liberty Zone notes Huckleberry Fin causing Special Snowflake syndrome
  6. The Last Tradition covers the joy of fools
  7. The Gateway Pundit notes super peaceful Syrians arrested in Geneva
  8. The Daley Gator has video of pure insanity I can’t even describe
  9. The Astute Bloggers have simple proof that Trump is untrusworthy
  10. Powerline notes Obama’s disgraceful Hanukkah party
  11. Nice Deb discusses how Obama wanted to handle the San Bernardino terrorist attack
  12. neo-neocon discusses whether Islam is a religion
  13. Legal Insurrection covers a Progressive college student making a bad mistake
  14. Jihad Watch notes what happened to a hugging Muslim
  15. And last, but not least, Jammie Wearing Fools notes how Iran celebrated Human Rights Day

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 | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

What Happens Now That Politicians Have Signed “Historic” Climate Pact?

By William Teach December 13, 2015 – 7:49 am

Warmists all over the world, including those in the media, are crowing about the “historic” climate accord signed in Paris. Now that it’s signed, what happens next? Hyper-Warmist Chris Mooney tells us at the Washington Post

Countries just adopted a historic climate change accord. Here’s what happens next

The word “historic,” already being used to describe the just-accepted Paris climate agreement, is more than warranted. The world will now have a new and comprehensive regime in place to shape how its diverse nations go about the urgent task of reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.

That’s why climate activists are ecstatic the world over right now. It’s a big deal.

It’s also essentially non-binding. Everything is voluntary, and nations can pull out of this non-binding, voluntary agreement with a 1 year notice. It has no force of law, and, since it will never be put in front of the US Senate for ratification, it will have zero force of law here in the U.S.

The more ambiguous news, however, is that this document, by its very nature, depends on key sectors of society to respond to help make sure its goals are realized. Countries, companies and individuals all across the planet will have to do the right things — and very hard things, at that. And it’s too soon to tell exactly how they will do so.

If the believers in anthropogenic climate change refuse to make more than token changes in their own lives, why should anyone else? I understand that this might be a tedious point I bring up a lot. A LOT. But, it is central to this debate. If “carbon pollution” is so dangerous, if the world is on a path for “catastrophic events”, why aren’t the believers doing their part? Very few do.

What’s more, even if everyone plays by the rules, the standards and goals set out by the Paris agreement may not be enough to prevent the catastrophic effects of climate change. New science suggests that forces already set in motion — the melting of glaciers, the release of carbon dioxide from thawing permafrost — could unleash considerable impacts that this new deal is unable to prevent.

See? Catastrophic. Doom has been prognosticated for decades, yet, Warmists aren’t doing their part.

But what will energy companies — and energy investors — do once they read that the world now intends to “reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible…and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter?” Will this send a strong enough “signal,” in the words of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, to change the decisions that these companies, and these wealthy individuals, make?

Again, Warmists themselves haven’t been acting on the “signal”. The fossil fuels companies will not stop producing fossil fuels unless one of three things happen: 1) run out of oil/coal, 2) the government mandates they stop producing oil/coal, 3) people stop using oil/coal. I think it’s a safe bet to say that 99.9% of Warmists refuse to give up fossil fuels in their own lives.

And — as has been often stated — these pledges are not compatible with the Paris agreement’s ambitious temperature target, which is to limit “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels.”

If the pact is so “historic”, why does it not accomplish anything? It won’t keep the world from hitting that 2C level (which it probably won’t anyhow, and, the number was plucked out of thin air, per the Climategate emails). By all accounts, it looks like this is simply a document to say “we’re Doing Something!!!!”, and the doing something is signing a document.

Of course, a goodly chunk of this non-binding, voluntary pact is about transferring money from big countries to little/3rd world ones. They included the notion of “loss and damage”, in order to force prosperous nations to pay up. Since this accord will not be put in front of the Legislative Branch, there is no legal mechanism for the US to transfer the money US taxpayers have taken from them by Government and send it to these leech nations.

How historic is this accord? Let’s ask unhinged hyper-Warmist James Hansen

Mere mention of the Paris climate talks is enough to make James Hansen grumpy. The former Nasa scientist, considered the father of global awareness of climate change, is a soft-spoken, almost diffident Iowan. But when he talks about the gathering of nearly 200 nations, his demeanor changes.

“It’s a fraud really, a fake,” he says, rubbing his head. “It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”

It’s strictly a feel good document. A non-binding, voluntary political document. But, I expect members of the Cult of Climastrology to implement the goals in their own lives. Will they? Based on history, the answer is a resounding “No.”

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: What Happens Now That Politicians Have Signed “Historic” Climate Pact? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Thank Goodness, We Finally Have An Anthem For “Climate Deniers”

By William Teach December 12, 2015 – 3:40 pm

Instead of providing factual, scientific proof, using the Scientific Method, which would convince Skeptics that everything that is happening is caused mostly/solely by Mankind’s release of “carbon pollution”, this is what they focus on

In 1985, a group of international superstars gathered together to record an iconic anthem that changed the way that the arts and activism engaged with each other. At the behest of legendary vocalist (and activist) Harry Belafonte, Michael Jackson and Lionel Richie wrote a single that was then performed by a host of the world’s top entertainers.

That song was, of course, We Are The World, and it ended up selling more than 20 million copies and raising some $63 million for humanitarian aid in both Africa and the US.

And now we have the opportunity to witness yet another epic musical project, but this time, the superstars are not compassionately raising money and awareness for famine victims, but are instead bringing a really important message from the Koch brothers to the people. That message, you’ll be happy to hear, is that we’re all good, and you really can’t trust those pesky climate scientists to know what they’re talking about.

It’s the single we’ve all been waiting for: The Climate Change Deniers’ Anthem.

They’re so cute at that age.

Say, how much carbon pollution does Funny Or Die create through their massive used of energy?

Read: Thank Goodness, We Finally Have An Anthem For “Climate Deniers” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 12, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a glacier melting from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Creeping Sharia, with a post on how many Muslims want a caliphate.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Doom: ‘Climate Change” Is Slowing The Earth, Making It Wobble

By William Teach December 12, 2015 – 7:59 am

All because tens of thousands of people took fossil fueled trips from all over the world to Paris to yammer on about how bad fossil fuels are and force their far left redistribution plans down your throat you drove a fossil fueled vehicle

Climate change means days are getting longer, scientists find
Duration of day has lengthened by a millisecond over the past 100 years as water from shrinking glaciers slows Earth’s rotation and shifts position of poles

…

Harvard University researchers have provided an answer to a long-held conundrum over how shrinking glaciers are affecting the rotation and axis of the Earth, calculating that the duration of a day has lengthened by a millisecond over the past 100 years.

The brakes will be more sharply applied to the Earth’s rotation as glaciers melt at an ever faster rate, meaning that at least five milliseconds will be added to each day over the course of the 21st century. The axis of the Earth will shift too, with the north pole set to move position by about 1cm (o.4in) during this century.

The research, published in Science Advances, apparently solved a scientific puzzle known as “Munk’s enigma”, which came from a 2002 researcher paper by oceanographer Walter Munk, examining how the melting of glaciers had altered the Earth’s rotation and axis.

Oh, dear Lord, a whole millisecond! We’re doomed! Nothing like this has ever happened before, surely! Unsurprisingly, this is based on lots and lots of assumptions and computer models. And, the article and study mostly avoids doing the blame game on fossil fuels. Not so over at Take Part

As pollution from burning fossil fuels continues to heat the atmosphere, the world’s glaciers are melting at an accelerating rate. Scientists widely agree that this meltwater has been a major factor in raising global sea levels about seven inches over the 20th century.

The movement of all that water is affecting the Earth’s rotation, according to a study published Friday in the journal Science.

“If you are melting glaciers from high latitudes—in Alaska, Greenland, or Iceland—you move mass away from the pole, toward the equator, which slows the Earth down,” said Jerry Mitrovica, the study’s lead author and a Harvard geophysicist who specializes in studying sea level change. “The change in the distribution of the mass from the poles to lower latitudes also causes the rotation to wobble slightly, because it’s being redistributed unequally.”

Huh. A wobble because you took a fossil fueled trip to visit Grandma over Christmas. And, of course, they’re all saying that the Earth will slow down even more. It could be a couple milliseconds! It could throw everything out of whack!

But, um, remember when the Cult of Climastrology was claiming that Hotcoldwetdry was making the Earth speed up? So, which is it? Eh, it doesn’t matter. This is all about attempting to scare people, so, consistency of talking points is unnecessary. I’m just shocked that life on Earth survived all these millisecond changes during previous warm and cool periods.

Read: Doom: ‘Climate Change” Is Slowing The Earth, Making It Wobble »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Anti-gun Activist Get’s Concealed Carry Permit To Prove He’s Not A Responsible Gun Owner

By William Teach December 12, 2015 – 7:38 am

Anti-gunnites are so cute when they’re proving the wrong point. Here we Zachary Stone, a senior at the University of Texas at Austin and a founder of UT Students Against Guns on Campus in the NY Times

I’m a Responsible Gun Owner? Seriously?

“WHAT are you doing?

I had just shot a gun for the first time. The instructor was yelling at me because he couldn’t understand how a 22-year-old missed a target some four feet tall and two feet wide, standing only nine feet away. But he was completely at ease when, 10 minutes later, he certified me for a concealed handgun license application.

In late May, after school let out, the Texas Legislature passed a bill that, among other things, authorized individuals with concealed handgun licenses to carry firearms in most college buildings. “Campus carry” was a hard-fought victory for Republicans. My school — the University of Texas at Austin — continues to largely oppose the law. Administrators, the student government and the faculty council have all publicly regretted our legal reality. We don’t like it that students 21 or older can get a license, buy a gun and bring that gun to class. One clever undergraduate’s protest involves students bringing sex toys to school because, unlike guns, they are not allowed on campus.

Stone’s idea here was to prove how darned easy it is to get a permit to carry on campus. And, he has zero knowledge of guns, didn’t bother to read the instructions that came with the gun, and the instructors supposedly made it super duper easy for him to pass. They had to sit through a six hour class, but the instructor gave them the answers for the test right before the test, making sure the attendees understood what is right and what is wrong. That was apparently Bad in Stone’s world. But, hey, he knows what to do and what not to do! The instructor helped him with the basics of shooting, such as looking through the sights and releasing a magazine.

And, after this instruction, he scored pretty well on shooting targets, 216, with 175 needed to pass. Looks like Stone soaked up the instruction.

Now, this whole exercise was about trying to punk the Republicans during a debate he was moderating between Dems and Republicans. I’m wondering if he did anything to attempt to stymie Democrats? Anyhow

After almost zero training and a 10-minute test, the State of Texas considers me responsible to carry a gun. Once my background check clears, I’ll have the license. I am not an outlier. According to the Texas Department of Public Safety, 99.7 percent of applicants in 2014 received their license.

Hosting the university debate, I did my best to remain impartial. But the Republicans got the toughest question after I told this story to a crowded auditorium.

“Given that the system allows me — lacking firearm experience — to get a license, would you be comfortable if we sat with each other in class, upon learning I’m secretly carrying a gun?”

What’s missing is the notion of personal responsibility. The class is there to help people pass and use their Constitutional and legal rights. It’s expected that gun owners will continue exercising personal responsibility through the use of firing ranges, and keeping up with the law regarding where it is legal to use the concealed carry permit. Liberals, unfortunately, have little in the way of personal responsibility, instead relying almost solely on Government dominance.

Much like driving a motor vehicle, carry a firearm is a responsibility. How many times do you see someone and wonder “how the heck did they get a license? Why does no one pull their license? They need a remedial driving course.”

To answer his question, the answer is yes. Stone obviously learned to use the weapon. He has a legal right to carry it on campus. And, if he’s sitting next to me and freezes during a situation where he should pull it, I’ll take it and use it properly. Of course, there is a lot lower chance that anyone hell bent on doing something bad will do it in a Gun Carry Zone. Active shooters do not like going places where people might shoot back quickly. Hence, the reason why the majority of shooter situations occur in No Gun Zones.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Anti-gun Activist Get’s Concealed Carry Permit To Prove He’s Not A Responsible Gun Owner »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Barking Moonbats | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Did You Just Throw Food At Me?

By William Teach December 11, 2015 – 8:26 pm

The dog looks scandalized.

Read: Did You Just Throw Food At Me? »

Posted in Like, Gnarly, Dude | Comments Off on Did You Just Throw Food At Me? | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove