Canadian Warmists Attempting To Get Skeptics Prosecuted

By William Teach December 5, 2015 – 2:51 pm

And, being Canada, they may very well get what they want, government prosecuting “heretics”

(Vice) A complaint filed Thursday could lead to criminal or civil charges against Canadian climate change denial groups.

Environmental advocacy organization Ecojustice filed the complaint to the Competition Bureau asking the Canadian agency to investigate groups paying for billboards and websites that claim global warming isn’t happening, and that humans aren’t driving climate change.

If the Commissioner of Competition finds there’s truth to the complaint, Canada’s Attorney General could bring charges against the climate change denial groups, or the Commissioner could start civil court action.

In the complaint, Ecojustice accuses “denier groups” of making claims without any basis in science, citing examples including a 2014 billboard that proclaimed “The sun is the main driver of climate change. Not you. Not CO2.” And a website that claims “the earth’s atmosphere is not warming,” and “Al Gore was wrong about CO2.”

They’re losing the debate, and their so-called science is completely wrong, hence, they’ll try to shut down opposing voices. Is there any wonder they are called fascists?

Read: Canadian Warmists Attempting To Get Skeptics Prosecuted »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 5, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is snow created by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Fire Andrea Mitchell, with a post noting what Obama was doing during the terrorist attack in California.

Read: If All You See… »

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

NY Times Calls For Gun Confiscation

By William Teach December 5, 2015 – 10:20 am

Anyone surprised?

From the article

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

All guns can be considered weapons of war. Do they propose banning all guns? Oh, and a goodly chunk of the scary looking ones are already banned in California.

It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

In other words, forced confiscation in violation of the Constitution. This is the modern Left, folks. Our Rights are not up for negotiation.

Read: NY Times Calls For Gun Confiscation »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Unhinged Tools | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

CFACT Offers Up Four Inconvenient Facts About ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach December 5, 2015 – 7:40 am

As tens of thousands of Warmists hob-nob in Paris for the latest Conference on the Parties, the 21st edition, spewing out vast amounts of “carbon pollution”, there are lots of facts that inconvenient, and glossed over. We could note that these same members of the Cult of Climastrology fail to live the lives they say Everyone Else should be forced to live. We could note that everything seems to be aimed not at fixing the climate (as if that could really happen, except in a fiction book or Warmist computer model. Same thing), but in finding ways to redistribute wealth and institute lots of restrictions on people, private entities, and economies. And then there are these four, as written by CFACT. Of course, we know Warmists will attack the messenger, not rebut the message

“Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.11 C per decade” – University of Alabama, Huntsville

“The troposphere has not warmed as fast as almost all climate models predict.” “After 1998, the observations are likely to be below the simulated values, indicating that the simulation as a whole are predicting too much warming.” – Remote Sensing Systems

“Satellite analysis of the upper atmosphere is more accurate, and should be adopted as the standard way to monitor global temperature change.” – NASA, April, 1990

There are many other quote, but, my favorite is that last one. Oh, and

All countries’ commitments from Paris = less than 0.05°C difference by the end of the century.

So, essentially, per modeling, no statistically significant change.

We also learn that sea rise is only 1mm to 3mm per year. This is not dangerous, it is not accelerating, and it is well within the average of sea rise over the last 7,000 years, when the great melting from the last glacial age ended. In a normal Holocene warm period, we should be seeing much more sea rise than is occurring.

Polar bear populations are up, the Arctic is not melting away, nor is Antarctica.

Extreme weather? Not happening. If anything, some types of “extreme weather” are actually down. Even the IPCC admitted in their 5th assessment report

“There is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century.

Virtually nothing that is happening in the world is the fault of human caused warming from carbon dioxide output. Human output of greenhouse gases has a minimal effect on the global atmosphere. This doesn’t mean Mankind has no effect. Things like ocean pollution, land use, and the Urban Heat Island effect have quite a bit of influence on perceived climate, as do the massaging of data. But, there is nothing dangerous going, there is nothing that hasn’t happened before during other Holocene warm periods going on, and we’re not all doomed. The computer models have failed, the global temperature is not going to shoot up a “best case” scenario of 1.2C (3.6F) by 2100, nor the worst cases offered.

It’s not a science, it’s a political movement. Nothing more, nothing less.

Read: CFACT Offers Up Four Inconvenient Facts About ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Republicans Are Totally Into Gun Pride

By William Teach December 5, 2015 – 7:11 am

Today’s opinion piece disguised as a straight news article, by Phillip Rucker and Sean Sullivan, appearing on the front page of the web page. It’s meant to say how Republicans are outside the mainstream in their support of guns and gun rights. Funny how the Washington Post never does the same about radicalized Muslims, who have been involved in multiple “mass shootings”, including San Bernardino

Gun rights? Try gun pride: GOP candidates display firearms machismo

Ted Cruz strode Friday into a shooting range here, where assault rifles and handguns were displayed on the walls and boxes of ammunition were stacked up for sale, to deliver tough talk following this week’s massacre in California.

“You don’t stop bad guys by taking away our guns. You stop bad guys by using our guns,” Cruz thundered to a roomful of Second Amendment activists. The Republican senator from Texas vowed that after he is elected president, any “lunatic” or “jihadist” who attempts to harm innocent Americans will “encounter the business end of firearms.”

There was a time when politicians professed their enthusiasm for gun rights by donning camouflage and hunting pheasants. Now, Republican presidential hopefuls campaign in active shooting ranges. They invite the media to watch them fire assault rifles or demolish the tax code with an AR-15. Or, as Cruz did in August, they wrap strips of raw bacon around the barrel of a machine gun to cook them with the heat of gunfire.

And Republican voters LOVE IT! We understand that this is a person who will defend the Constitution.

Republican politics have hardened from gun rights to gun pride, as candidates embrace and show off the more militaristic features of weaponry.

Of course, as most bed-wetting liberals fail to notice, no matter how you dress up the gun, it’s still has the same characteristics of non-scary looking guns

Here’s the money quote

“If you’re a Republican candidate these days and can’t handle a firearm, all you can run for is the border,” said Mark McKinnon, a veteran GOP media strategist. “Republicans are all about being tough on crime, tough on terrorism and just plain tough.”

Can anyone find a similar quote about Democrats? These are the people who seem to support criminals (for instance, Tookie, Mumia, and Michael Brown), want un-fettered illegal immigration and to bring over “Syrian” refugees who are completely unknown, have whined about the war on terrorism and call any, even minor, condemnation of Muslim extremists, “Islamophobia”, and, as far as toughness goes, they caterwaul, carry on, and need safe spaces over minor things that upset them.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post: Republicans Are Totally Into Gun Pride »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Wonky Media | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

During Shooting Rampage, Tashfeen Malik Pledged Allegiance To ISIS Leader

By William Teach December 4, 2015 – 3:47 pm

That thud you just heard was the anti-gun Liberals losing their narrative

(CNN)  Investigators think that as the San Bernardino, California, massacre was happening, female shooter Tashfeen Malik posted a pledge of allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Facebook, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.

Malik’s post was made on an account with a different name, one U.S. official said. The officials did not explain how they knew Malik made the post.

A law enforcement official said it appeared that Wednesday’s mass shooting — which left 14 people dead and 21 wounded before the two attackers, Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, were killed in a shootout with police — may have been inspired by ISIS.

I wonder if Obama will still tell us that ISIS is a JV team and is “contained”? Perhaps he and the Left can tell us that ‘climate change’ is more dangerous? Or that the Paris Hotcoldwetdry meeting is a “rebuke” to ISIS? At what point will Lefties allow their narrow beliefs to come to terms with radical Islam being a danger? For goodness sake, one would think that Progressives would realize that hardcore Islam is in direct competition in the goal for global dominance?

Meanwhile, has someone told Salon?

From the link

The mass shootings that plague us, and the daily individual acts of gun violence and death should, however, lead us to make access to guns more difficult. We should, that is, seek to “control” access to them and their use. But even that’s not going far enough. We should get rid of them, that is, ban them. Guns create too many problems, promote too much fear, and lead to too many deaths to not consider banning them. Perhaps they were necessary at some point in our history, but let’s declare that that time has run its course.

They’re just saying what the Far Left really thinks, but won’t say for fear of alienating the American voter.

Read: During Shooting Rampage, Tashfeen Malik Pledged Allegiance To ISIS Leader »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, RoP | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 4, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a pastoral countryside that would be perfect for a solar farm, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Primordial Slack, with a post on the hollowness of honest talk on gun control. And follow Joan on Twitter.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Whoops: Most Cult Of Climastrology Arguments Fail

By William Teach December 4, 2015 – 10:30 am

They’ve been spreading awareness since the 1980’s. They have the backing of government politicians, agencies, and massive amounts of taxpayer funds. They have their messages broadcast on a constant basis within the liberal news media. Movies and documentaries are crafted. Warmist teachers pass on the doctrine. And, yet

(Daily Caller)  A government-funded study has bad news for environmentalists: skeptics are winning the battle to sway public opinion on global warming.

Michigan State University (MSU) researchers gave nearly 1,600 participants fake news articles about global warming — both skeptical and alarmist — and had them complete surveys about their beliefs on the issue. The study was funded by the National Science Foundation.

Researchers found none of the alarmist arguments about global warming changed “core beliefs” on the subject, but survey participants presented with skeptical arguments said they are more likely to doubt man-made global warming.

From the link, which is Watts Up With That?, citing the journal Topics in Cognitive Science

The research, funded by the National Science Foundation, finds that climate-change advocates are largely failing to influence public opinion. Climate-change foes, on the other hand, are successfully changing people’s minds — Republicans and Democrats alike — with messages denying the existence of global warming.

“This is the first experiment of its kind to examine the influence of the denial messages on American adults,” said Aaron M. McCright, a sociologist and lead investigator on the study. “Until now, most people just assumed climate change deniers were having an influence on public opinion. Our experiment confirms this.”

In other words, the arguments and facts provided by the Skeptical side are winning. The Internet is probably one of the worst things that happened to Warmists, since it allowed people to view opposing viewpoints on the subject of ‘climate change.” Hence the rationale from Warmists that they need to shut down opposing voices, in their typical fascistic manner.

Read: Whoops: Most Cult Of Climastrology Arguments Fail »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Low Energy Prices Makes Warmists Very Upset

By William Teach December 4, 2015 – 7:22 am

No matter that low energy prices reduce the cost of living for the middle and lower classes, that it allows them to look for better paying jobs further away from home in this weak jobs market, that it allows them to heat their homes so as not to freeze to death. The Cult of Climastrology has a narrative

(Daily Caller) The International Monetary Fund’s economists are worried that coal, oil and natural gas prices are so cheap, they’ll reduce the willingness to invest in politically-favored green energy technologies they say are necessary to fight global warming.

“Fossil fuel prices are likely to stay ‘low for long,’” wrote two IMF economists for the organization’s blog.

“Notwithstanding important recent progress in developing renewable fuel sources, low fossil fuel prices could discourage further innovation in and adoption of cleaner energy technologies,” wrote IMF economists Rabah Arezki and Maurice Obstfeld. “The result would be higher emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.”

In many parts of Europe, particularly England and Germany, the cost of energy had gone up so much that citizens could not afford to heat their homes during the brutal winters that have occurred 5 of the last 7. They are also switching to the use of wood pellets, which helps increase deforestation.

Yet, strangely, these same people who complain about the low cost of fossil fuels refuse to give up their use themselves. But, what to do about other people?

(UK Guardian) Expressing the hope that the Paris meeting would “open the door” to a future international agreement on carbon prices, the IMF has said such a deal would generate substantial fiscal revenues by eliminating fossil fuels subsidies and by charging for the damage caused by emissions.

“A tax on upstream carbon sources is one easy way to put a price on carbon emissions, although some countries may wish to use other methods, such as emissions trading schemes,” it said.

It added that without global coordination on carbon prices, “the cost to the world economy of whatever aggregate emissions reduction is achieved will be unnecessarily high”.

In other words, artificially make low cost energy expensive via Government. Which will only hurt the poor and middle classes.

Read: Low Energy Prices Makes Warmists Very Upset »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Totally Upset That GOP Won’t Allow People On Arbitrary No Fly List To Be Denied Firearms

By William Teach December 4, 2015 – 7:00 am

There are lots and lots of silly opinion pieces and editorials, long on outrage, short on facts. The NY Times Editorial Board provides possibly the dumbest one of the day

Tough Talk and a Cowardly Vote on Terrorism

Investigators now believe that what initially seemed a workplace shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., was a well-planned attack by a married couple with at least some contact with Islamic extremists.

The evolving situation has forced Republican leaders and presidential candidates to contort themselves: talking tough on terrorism, yet ignoring the fact that the two were armed to the teeth with two .223-caliber assault rifles and two 9-millimeter semiautomatic pistols, and hundreds of rounds, all purchased legally.

Armed to the teeth! Legally purchased. Wait, wouldn’t this be part of that whole “Islamophobia” liberals write about?

While the nation suffered through the shock of another bloody massacre, on Thursday every Senate Republican except Mark Kirk of Illinois voted against legislation to prevent people on the F.B.I.’s consolidated terrorist watchlist from purchasing guns or explosives.

The measure has been introduced repeatedly since 2007. The Government Accountability Office has documented that over years of congressional blockage, hundreds of suspected terrorists on the watchlist bought guns.

Why didn’t Democrats pass it in 2009 or 2010, when they owned Congress and the White House?

No matter. The House speaker, Paul Ryan, issued his party’s weak defense of arming potential terrorism suspects on Thursday morning: “I think it’s very important to remember people have due process rights in this country, and we can’t have some government official just arbitrarily put them on a list.” Mr. Ryan’s Senate colleagues demonstrated that they are more worried about the possibility that someone might be turned away from a gun shop than shielding the public against violent criminals.

Got that? It’s weak to actually allow people their Constitutional right of due process.

How well has the No Fly List worked?

  • Children, even ones under the age of 1, have been on it
  • A marine returning from Iraq, David Brown, was on it
  • Senator Ted Kennedy was on it and had trouble flying
  • John Lewis, US Representative, was on it
  • David Nelson, the actor best known for his role on The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, is among various persons named David Nelson who have been stopped at airports because their name apparently appears on the list
  • US Senator Ted Stevens’ wife Catherine has been stopped because they thought she might be Cat Stevens

Those are just a smattering of the problems with the list. Nelson Mandela, and even Nuns, are on/have been on the no fly list. Liberals used to complain about the No Fly List, decrying it as un-Constitutional, arbitrary, and just wrong. It can be darned near impossible to find out if one is on it, till one takes an evil fossil fueled flight (well, tries to), and very hard to get off it. Oh, wait, look


The No-Fly List Is Unconstitutional

The federal government’s no-fly list, which prevents those suspected of terrorist ties from boarding flights in the United States or flying through American airspace, is reported to include more than 20,000 names—a number that metastasized after the Sept. 11 attacks. There’s a low evidentiary standard for getting on the list. Once on, it’s not only difficult to get off but almost impossible to find out why, exactly, one was added in the first place.

That was the Editors blog for the NY Times back in 2014.

Perhaps the NY Times Editorial Board can answer the question “would this have stopped any of the “mass shootings”, including the recent one in San Bernardino?” Oh, and another question: “will the NY Times freak out when Muslims who have not done anything wrong other than going to nations which are hotbeds of Islamic terrorism are denied the right to purchase firearms due to being on the no fly list?”

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Totally Upset That GOP Won’t Allow People On Arbitrary No Fly List To Be Denied Firearms »

Posted in Constitution, Journalistic Malpractice | Comments Off on NY Times Totally Upset That GOP Won’t Allow People On Arbitrary No Fly List To Be Denied Firearms | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove