…is an evil fossil fueled truck causing defoliation and desertification, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on so much for the power of the purse.
Read: If All You See… »
…is an evil fossil fueled truck causing defoliation and desertification, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on so much for the power of the purse.
Read: If All You See… »
Now that the Cult of Climastrology has their super awesome, totally historic Paris agreement, you know, the one that is non-binding, voluntary, and has no force of law, they want you to watch out for the New Deniers, as written by hyper-Warmist Naomi Oreskes
There is a new form of climate denialism to look out for – so don’t celebrate yet
After the signing of a historic climate pact in Paris, we might now hope that the merchants of doubt – who for two decades have denied the science and dismissed the threat – are officially irrelevant.
But not so fast. There is also a new, strange form of denial that has appeared on the landscape of late, one that says that renewable sources can’t meet our energy needs.
Oddly, some of these voices include climate scientists, who insist that we must now turn to wholesale expansion of nuclear power. Just this past week, as negotiators were closing in on the Paris agreement, four climate scientists held an off-site session insisting that the only way we can solve the coupled climate/energy problem is with a massive and immediate expansion of nuclear power. More than that, they are blaming environmentalists, suggesting that the opposition to nuclear power stands between all of us and a two-degree world.
Hmm, seems like the Cult is pushing back against other Warmists who propose increasing the use of nuclear power. Remember when Warmists were saying “everything but fossil fuels?” Now they want to shoot down nuclear. Here’s the part, beyond the in-fighting of the CoC, that caught my attention
That would have troubling consequences for climate change if it were true, but it is not. Numerous high quality studies, including one recently published by Mark Jacobson of Stanford University, show that this isn’t so. We can transition to a decarbonized economy without expanded nuclear power, by focusing on wind, water and solar, coupled with grid integration, energy efficiency and demand management. In fact, our best studies show that we can do it faster, and more cheaply.
There are many definitions of demand management, depending on the economic sector. Since there are so many, let’s use a simple one from Wikipedia
Demand Management is a planning methodology used to forecast [predict], plan for and manage the demand for products and services. This can be at macro levels as in economics and at micro levels in public service organizations both governmental and NGO, industries including energy.
When an iPhone is released, they are certainly using this method to account for what they think the demand will be, as well as use methods to push the demand up. Consider the upcoming release of the new Star Wars movie? All those product tie ins? Think they aren’t part of bumping up the demand to see the movie? They all have further forecast and plan for having enough theaters and showings to keep up with the demand. Now, consider this in terms of environmentalism
In natural resources management and environmental policy more generally, demand management refers to policies to control consumer demand for environmentally sensitive or harmful goods such as water and energy. Within manufacturing firms the term is used to describe the activities of demand forecasting, planning, and order fulfillment. In the environmental context demand management is increasingly taken seriously to reduce the economy’s throughput of scarce resources for which market pricing does not reflect true costs. Examples include metering of municipal water, and carbon taxes on gasoline.
What the CoC means by demand management is limiting the availability of energy and other products to limit the carbon footprint of everything throughout the economy. The most simple form of this is by artificially increasing the cost of energy, particularly fossil fuels, through various methods. Another form will be smart meters, in which the energy companies, backed by Government, can limit the energy used by each consumer. They would have access to shut of energy at private residences. At it’s peak, this would mean being told when we could take showers, how long, when we can run dishwashers, clothes washers, and clothes dryers. Policies that would force citizens to reduce their energy use to comply with “carbon neutral” mandates. We see this playing out in Europe, where prices have skyrocketed, and energy companies only have so much energy they are allowed to produce, leaving people, especially the elderly and poor, in the dark, while so many others need to turn to things like burning wood (especially wood pellets) to heat their homes during the wintertime. Hence, governments are now going after the types of wood burning heaters used.
Cultists use the innocuous term “demand management” to hide their true Big Government, fascistic intentions. Interestingly, they never seem to realize that this will negatively affect their own lives.
BTW, they should throw me some cash, because I coined the phrase “New Climate Deniers” years ago, as part of the categories under Global Warming.
Read: Warmists Should Totally Watch Out For The New Deniers »
Put this one in the category of Things That Really Matter To Me
(USA Today) Straight outta Compton and into the Rock Hall.
N.W.A is joining the 31st class of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. The legendary hip-hop group will be inducted alongside Cheap Trick, Chicago, Steve Miller and Deep Purple on April 8 at Brooklyn’s Barclays Center. (snip)
In the online fan vote, conducted on multiple sites including USATODAY.com, Chicago led with 23.4%, followed by Yes, The Cars, Deep Purple and Miller. The aggregate of the fan vote counted as a ballot in the official voting. Winners of the past two fan votes — Stevie Ray Vaughan and Double Trouble for the 2015 class, and Kiss for 2014 — subsequently made it into the Hall.
It’s about darned time that these groups, particularly Deep Purple, have not been inducted before. I once placed Deep Purple as my #2 heavy metal/hard rock groups of all time, just ahead of Led Zeppelin, and I stand by that. They are one of the most influential rock groups of all. If you know rock, you know Smoke On the Water. When it comes on the radio, your brain says “Smoke On The Water” after the first note. They’ve sold over 100 million albums worldwide. They were one of the original bands to hit Japan, and their album Made In Japan is one of the greatest live albums ever. This leads to Deep Purple, in any lineup, being a tremendous live band, something that is Important to election to the RRHOFF. Yes, they were, and still are, one of the best. No one left disappointed by the quality of the music.
Drummer Ian Pace stated, right before the announcement, that he wondered which members, exactly, would be inducted, what with the lineup changes. Also
“The Hall Of Fame should be embarrassed for not inducting us already. Look at some of the non-entities who’ve got in. I won’t name them, but just have a look at some of those names, and you’ll know who I mean. What have they ever done for rock ‘n’ roll? Nothing. Having these artists in before DEEP PURPLE undermines what it is supposed to represent.”
Singer Ian Gillan had previously had some rather unkind words for the idiots at the RRHOF. And he’s right. How is that Chicago, Cheap Trick, and Steve Miller had never been elected before? All three have been making music forever. They are tremendous live in concert. They have songs that are staples of Classic Rock stations, and you know the name of the song and group the minute they come on the radio. But, how do they not have Yes? Judas Priest? Bad Company? The Cars? Doobie Brothers? ELO? Iron Maiden? Jethro Tull? Journey? Moody Blues? Motley Crue? Pat Benatar? Thin Lizzy? And many others?
Yet, N.W.A. just go elected. They aren’t even close to a rock and roll group. There are lots of non-R&R groups. Aretha Franklin? Ray Charles? The Supremes? Run DMC? Public Enemy? A few others? Granted, there aren’t as many non-rock acts as one thinks, many are Motown, R&B and soul, and, yes, are all time great acts, no doubt. Do they belong in the RRHOF? Do any rap groups belong in the least? Do country acts belong, such as Johnny Cash? And then there are rock groups who aren’t that good that are in, and well ahead of ones who deserved it.
But, anyhow, Deep Purple is finally in. So, there’s that.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Important Things: Deep Purple Elected To Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame »

No worries: Cultists will find a way to fix this, either through Excuse Making or changing the data.
Read: Oops: Gavin Schmidt Makes Inconvenient Admission On Satellite Data »
…is an evil carbon polluting truck causing clouds of carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on Leftist’s latest idea, pee powered socks.
Read: If All You See… »
Why, yes, yes they are going to attempt to push another “assault weapons” ban
(The Hill) Assault weapons would be banned under new legislation from House Democrats.
Following a string of recent mass shootings, Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) is looking to renew the assault weapons ban that was originally signed by former President Bill Clinton but expired more than a decade ago.
The Assault Weapons Ban of 2015, which Cicilline will introduce Wednesday afternoon, would ensure that no such guns are manufactured while placing new restrictions on the sale of already existing assault weapons.
The bill has about 90 Democratic co-sponsors, including House Minority WHIP Steny Hoyer (Md.) and Rep. Steve Israel (N.Y.).It has no hope of passing through Congress, however, given opposition from Republicans.
“Assault weapons are designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible,†Cicilline said in a statement to The Hill. “We need to do everything we can to reduce the toll of gun violence by keeping these weapons out of our communities.â€
At best, the original ban reduced “gun violence” a tiny bit. The vast majority of buyers are purchasing for sport, hunting, or defense. I’ll put this up again

Those weapons are essentially identical. They shoot the same round. They can both take the same magazines. They both have relatively the same accuracy. They both shoot just as many bullets in the same amount of time: one trigger pull, one round expelled. Yet, the top one is lighter and more compact, making it easier for women to use it for self defense. Why do the anti-gunnites want to make it harder for women to defend themselves?
Read: House Democrats To Push Legislation On Scary Looking Weapons »
This just goes to show, Warmists are never satisfied, and second, that this agreement is idiotic, not “historic”
Climate change deal: five reasons to be glad, five to be gloomy
Why we should be glad
1 If temperatures can be held to a rise of 1.5C, catastrophe may be averted (these people sound like the same who stand on corners with “Repent: the end is nigh” signs)2 Targets are set, and governments can be held to account (alas, no, as this is non-binding with no force of law)
3 Air pollution and the importance of preserving forests are now under the spotlight (sadly, they’re more worried about “carbon pollution” rather than real air pollutants. Furthermore, “green” initiatives have increased the use of wood for heating, particularly in Europe)
4 Much greater investment in renewable technology is promised (this would be great, if it wasn’t being used to reward political donors, who rarely seem to create anything new and/or usable)
5 Vulnerable countries will get $100bn a year to help adapt to climate change (essentially, this is a redistribution scheme. But, hey, maybe the US can stop being the provider of money round the world now)
Then we have
Why we should be gloomy
1 Countries will wriggle out of their commitments (again, non-binding, voluntary, no force of law, and countries can give a 1 year notice that they are pulling out. Not that Kyoto worked in the least previously)2 The agreement buys us time, but will it be enough? (the agreement actually does nothing to get to 2C number that was picked out of a hat)
3 Most agreements benefit big business over small landholders (Surprise!!!! Politicians favoring their donor class)
4 Climate change assistance may be funded by diverting aid (taking from useful programs to fund this politically motivated boondoggle)
5 There is no legal responsibility for rich countries to help poorer ones with adapting to climate change (there’s no legal responsibility whatsoever. But, the US has done more to help people in other countries than any other country since the end of WWII, and all we get is hatred)
At the end of the day, what we see is a political document that does nothing, is unworkable, is non-binding, voluntary, has no force of law, but, it does allow a bunch of politicians to say they’re Doing Something with their sound-bites. Meanwhile, there are real environmental and other issues out there in the world. Poverty, terrorism, horrendous treatment of women in many countries, Islamic extremism, slavery, child labor, the list goes on an on. And these morons are worried about a tiny increase in global temperatures in over 160, which, whether it’s mostly/solely anthropogenic or mostly/solely natural, should be of little concern. But, Warmists are concerned because they are part of the overall Progressive movement (nice fascism), designed to put more and more power in the hands of these same people, along with higher and higher taxes.
Read: Guardian Provides Reasons To Be Sad And Gloomy Over Paris Climahysteric Agreement »
The WP’s Scott Clement highlights a few other things in the poll prior to the information on guns
Over three-quarters of Americans doubt the nation’s ability to stop “lone wolf†terrorist attacks by individuals acting on their own, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Despite widespread doubts about security, the poll finds fears of a family member being a victim of terrorism have not risen since a shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., killed 14 and attacks in Paris last month that left 130 people dead.
An interesting dichotomy. As to the first, when citizens learn that the Department Of Homeland Security refuses to actually vet people coming to the U.S. via their social media accounts because it might Offend them and other silly notions, including people from areas known to be hotbeds of Islamic terrorism, they realize that the government is full of politically correct idiots, led by an overall idiot. Doesn’t inspire much confidence in stopping terrorists. As to the second, perhaps it’s because more citizens are armed?
President Obama, who addressed the nation in a rare Oval Office speech following the shootings, continues to receive negative marks for handling terrorism and dealing with Islamic State militants. Despite his call for greater gun restrictions aimed at keeping high-powered guns out of terrorist hands, the Post-ABC poll finds record high opposition to a ban on assault weapons.
The poll finds that 51% disapprove of Obama’s overall handling of his job, along with 53% disapproving of his handling of terrorism and 59% against his handling of ISIS. Then we get

That’s right, more want citizens to be armed. We can’t quite dig into the numbers, as it seems those questions have been embargoed for the moment in the poll data.
On a specific policy, 53 percent of Americans now oppose a national ban on assault weapons, with opposition rising 11 percentage points from 2013 to its highest level in Post-ABC polling since 1994.
Huh. Democrats have been yammering for more and more gun control, and citizen support against Democrat proposals keeps rising.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Washington Post Poll Shows Collapsing Support For Gun Bans »
The Paris agreement is so historic and meaningful that Warmists are going to continue spreading awareness
(LA Times) Even as it became clear that a historic climate agreement could be reached in France, activists were organizing protests deep into next year, some liberal political leaders were pledging to go beyond whatever goals the agreement might yield and diplomats, scientists and consultants were planning the next global summit.
In the final days of COP21, as the 21st Conference of Parties came to be called, a hashtag briefly came to life on Twitter: #COP22.
That would be the 22nd Conference of Parties, scheduled for next November in Morocco. (snip)
While many questions remain about the agreement — Will it truly help solve the problem? Will nations honor their commitments? Will investors move away from fossil fuels? — it appears to include at least one guarantee: The century ahead will be filled with more conflict, progress, protests, ambition and intransigence about climate change.
And more conferences.
Huh. Sounds more like a political movement rather than anything based on science. I’d be impressed if these climactivists were pushing others to walk the talk, and doing so themselves.