…is a world being turned to desert from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Cold Fury, with a post on digging ditches.
Is everyone getting their post-holidays exercise?
Read: If All You See… »
…is a world being turned to desert from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Cold Fury, with a post on digging ditches.
Is everyone getting their post-holidays exercise?
Read: If All You See… »
There’s a reason it’s called the Silly Season
(Washington Post) Donald Trump said in an interview that rival Ted Cruz’s Canadian birthplace was a “very precarious†issue that could make the senator from Texas vulnerable if he became the Republican presidential nominee.
“Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem,†Trump said when asked about the topic. “It’d be a very precarious one for Republicans because he’d be running and the courts may take a long time to make a decision. You don’t want to be running and have that kind of thing over your head.â€
Trump added: “I’d hate to see something like that get in his way. But a lot of people are talking about it and I know that even some states are looking at it very strongly, the fact that he was born in Canada and he has had a double passport.â€

To be perfectly clear, the facepalm is for Trump. And for those who will bring up Trump being an Obama Birther, let’s not forget that it was started by Team Hillary supporters.
Meanwhile, Ted Cruz has released a video that has horrified the Credentialed Media
Wisely, this frames the debate in economic and legal terms. He’s said it before: what if illegals were coming across the border and taking the jobs of non-low wage citizens? Think there would be an outcry? What if they were taking the jobs of politicians?
In other words, are we set for more preachy movies about Hotcoldwetdry?
Can Hollywood save us from climate catastrophe?
By taking on the link between football and brain injuries, the recently released movie“Concussion” reminds us of the potential for Hollywood to shape attitudes and beliefs about controversial topics through entertainment.
The film has put America’s most popular sport under a microscope and sparked a dialogue about children participating in contact sports and the role of the National Football League in preventing injuries to its players.
Would this be the movie that bombed? And made even less money this past weekend. And isn’t even being mentioned at major sports sites like Fox Sports, CBS Sports, Sports Illustrated, and ESPN, among others. While an important issue, no one is talking about it. So, I’m not sure if this is the best example.
Certainly, there is the potential for a similar movie to be made about climate change — one that builds on “An Inconvenient Truth” and speaks to a new generation.
Let’s hope so, because it’s amusing when Hollywood makes a preachy movie and it tanks. People do not want preachy at the movies: they want to be entertained.
Some from the scientific community argue that interjecting Hollywood into the climate debate may be a bad thing, as it could further blur the lines between fact and fiction, especially with a public that remains skeptical of science.
But, with a public that holds views on climate change that largely align with political affiliation, Hollywood might offer a rare opportunity to cut across these lines with a message that is both entertaining and eye-opening. Indeed, there is already evidence that movies such as “The Day After Tomorrow” can change consumer attitudes and beliefs about climate change.
Funny part is, The Day After Tomorrow is more about a coming ice age than “global warming”.
As scientists learn more about the potential impacts of climate change, more stories are emerging that easily could be spun to read like nightmarish sci-fi movies. Here are a few examples:
They would bomb. And bomb badly. The old 50’s monster movies did well because there was concern, legitimate, real concern, over a real issue: nuclear weapons. They were new, and scary, and movie makers used them to great effect to create monsters, such as Godzilla and giant tarantulas, to entertain without preaching.
Hey, I have a great idea: perhaps the Cult of Climastrology could produce rock solid evidence, based on the Scientific Model, that proves that mankind’s release of CO2 is mostly/solely responsible for climatic changes.
Read: Say, Can Hollywood Save Us From “Climate Catastrophe”? »
Thankfully, we now have the opinion of Clara Nevins, a “high school activist, dancer, and writer” (strange, she doesn’t want to be a STEM major?), who isn’t impressed with all those old fogey Warmists when she took a long fossil fueled trip to the Paris Hotcoldwetdry conference
A Millennial’s Take on Climate Activism
….
Paris was abuzz. At the Chamber of Commerce, 200 adults in business suits, wearied by two hours of oil companies’ execu-speak, slammed coffee at the 11 am break. There I was, a 5-foot-3 15 year old in a ponytail in a room full of blue suits and gray hair. I felt so out of place.
The next speakers were equally ancient-looking oil industry CEOs again throwing around terms like API, KBD, and NGL. I tried my best to follow but I could not comprehend all the acronyms, and I certainly couldn’t imagine seeing my friends in the audience trying to understand.
The next day I hoped I might feel more at home at the Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network conference. My mom and I arrived at a tired conference hall filled to the brim with women my mom’s age. One woman was standing up, swaying to the bongos played by two indigenous women while another woman tried to get everyone’s attention.
“Ladies, before we start the day off, I want to welcome the oceans and the rivers into this room,” the woman at the podium began. At that moment, I felt like I was in the 70s Coke commercial, “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing.” This way of rallying felt so antiquated. Again, I felt so out of place.
Rather ageist, wouldn’t you say? Even sneering. And she totally wasn’t inspired, and wants to find a way to get all the other Special Snowflakes involved. Heck, they might as well, because, thanks to the economic and other policies from the people and political parties they support, the jobs market stinks.
When older people with flowy hair or business suits speak about climate change, it doesn’t have an urgency that seems like ours when in fact, this issue is more ours than any single cause.
So, obviously, she has Big Ideas to solve this who issue of a minor 0.8C increase in global temperatures over 166 years, right? A plan to stop the prognosticated doom of a 1.2C rise by 2100?
I realized I shouldn’t dismiss or have disdain for the people who created the movement and have led us to this point, but now, we must take it from here, make it our own, and transition it with language and stakes that will have meaning for my millennial peers. So my fellow millennials, rise up, show up and make noise to send a message. Buy conscientiously and sustainably and forcefully encourage your parents and friends to do the same. This issue needs fresh and innovative ideas so use your vote, use your wallet and use your force because the power is in our hands.
She may not have gray hair and be her mom’s age or ancient-looking or antiquated. She’s not banging on bongos, acting like the hippies who started all this, but, her ideas are exactly the same. Spreading awareness and a token change in consumerism. Just with more energy!
Read: Special Snowflake Warmist Isn’t Impressed With Old Gray Hair Warmists »
Jeffrey asked yesterday why I wasn’t writing about the “standoff” in Oregon. Well, let’s see. First off, I really do not care all that much. These are some foolish people trying to make a point, yet the people they are supposedly making a point over want them to stop. There’s no doubt that there are some harsh, and seemingly inconsistent, penalties being placed on the Hammonds. There’s no doubt that it should disturb everyone how much land out west the federal government owns. There’s no doubt that federal agencies like BLM have always ruled with a heavy hand. The feds are constantly adding new rules and regulations and penalties, taking more land, causing problems for the folks who live out west.
But, these “militia” who took over the building could have done it better. Leave the guns at home. That’s not to say that they can’t have them, or that there’s anything wrong with them, but the optics of having them guaranteed that the focus of the leftist media would be on the guns, rather than on the complaints.
That said, are they engaged in the 1st Amendment right to “protest peaceably”? They took over an unused building in the middle of nowhere. No one is making threats. No one is trashing the place. Or damaging it. IMO, the best thing would be to simply ignore them. No big police presence. No standoffs. Leave them along and they’ll go away. the White House wisely calls this a “local matter”.
My only real interest in this is the double standard as pushed by the liberal media and Leftists. Consider how the media and leftists portrayed protests in Wisconsin. Did they highlight the millions in damage to the State house? Or the filth? The feces? No, it was pretty much fawning coverage and support, all while these protesters interrupted state business.
How about in Ferguson? The most folks on the left could do was give a little “tsk, tsk” as the “protesters” became violent, looting stores, burning buildings, firing guns, fighting, assaulting police officers. Made threats. We saw something similar in Baltimore and other places.
How about the entire Occupy movement? The main demonstration in NYC featured the need for safe spaces within the park to protect women from being raped. There were murders, stabbings, and assaults. Fighting. People defecating on police cars and people’s doorsteps. Damaging property. In other areas, Occupiers were charged with violence, including intention to blow up a bridge. Were they called out on this by the same people who are calling the militia in Oregon “terrorists”? Saying they should be shot and killed? Blown up? Of course not.
Look at the USA Today Editorial Board
Nevada rancher Ammon Bundy proclaimed Monday to a crowd of TV cameras and reporters that he and a small group of armed followers had taken over a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon to “restore and defend the Constitution.â€
The trouble with Bundy’s patriotic sounding claim is that the Constitution stands for the rule of law — which Bundy and his crew are breaking. They have no right to take over the federally owned Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. The protesters, some armed, show their blatant disregard not just for the nation’s laws but also for the danger they have created.
Interestingly, the Founders rather did the same thing. Took up arms against the Government. And used them. These guys aren’t using them.
But, it’s instructive how suddenly we’re supposed to Follow The Law when it’s a protest that doesn’t follow the Leftist Narrative. Perhaps a Leftist could explain this double standard?
Read: The Deal In Oregon: My Take »
Seriously, how could our ancestors do this? Driving fossil fueled vehicles and refusing to buy local and using air conditioning. Bad humans! This is an AFP article being pimped by ultra-leftist Raw Story in order to push The Narrative about how evil climate change is
Climate change starved the Earth’s ‘real King Kong’ into extinction: researchers
The largest ape to roam Earth died out 100,000 years ago because it failed to tuck into savannah grass after climate change hit its preferred diet of forest fruit, scientists suggest.
Gigantopithecus — the closest Nature ever came to producing a real King Kong — weighed five times as much as an adult man and probably stood three meters (nine feet) tall, according to sketchy estimates.
In its heyday a million years ago, it inhabited semi-tropical forests in southern China and mainland Southeast Asia. (snip)
These narrow preferences (of food) did not pose a problem for Gigantopithecus until Earth was struck by a massive ice age during the Pleistocene Epoch, which stretched from about 2.6 million to 12,000 years ago.
That’s right, it died out long ago. What would be an interesting bit of science on things that happened in history is being used to promote an agenda regarding climate change today. It was global cooling, an actual ice age, that seemingly helped kill off the giant apes. The article, with its prolific use of the phrase climate change, is supposed to make people think of the current climatic changes (without mentioning that the current warm period isn’t even as warm as previous warm periods) and worry about DOOM.
Now, if only today’s Warmism would die out. Of course, it will be around for quite some time, regardless of what real science says, and regardless of what actual events show, because this is about pushing a hardcore Leftist political agenda.
Read: Bummer: Climate Change Killed Off The Real King Kong! »
…is a rising sea in a world turning to desert from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Last Refuge, with a post explaining what is going on in the Oregon standoff.
Read: If All You See… »