Iran’s Rouhani Totally Concerned With Climate Change, Says Terrorism Gets In Way Of Solving It

By William Teach September 27, 2015 – 7:54 am

If I didn’t tell you up front that the speaker was Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, might you think this was Obama or some other leading Warmist? He gave a speech to the UN Summit for Sustainable Development Goals, first offering prayers for those killed during the Hajj, before diving into Hotcoldwetdry and terrorism

Environmental problems have taught us humans living on planet earth that we are all in the same boat. What others do also impacts our destiny. We cannot be assured of our own peace and security, whilst ignoring how others are living. Without extensive cooperation at the national, regional and international levels, achieving the ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ will be very difficult. Such cooperation should be mindful of our common destiny and joint commitment towards important human responsibilities.

A common destiny requires a common goal. But this doesn’t mean that the responsibilities of all are the same. It would be impossible to achieve the post-2015 sustainable development goals without considering the responsibilities of states and their share in creating the current environmental status quo and would result in fruitless argument.

Rouhani’s vision of an authoritarian destiny is surely different from other Warmists. He would prefer one based on a world-wide Caliphate, led by Iran (hence a major reason Iran stands against ISIS), while Western Warmists would prefer a secular destiny, dominated by Progressivism (nice fascism).

As I said in the summit meeting of climate change, the West Asia region is not only facing hotter climate conditions and challenges of continued extensive drought. But, it is also grappling with the scourge of terrorism and extremist violence. In other words, violence against man and nature are the dual calamities befallen the West Asia region.

Interesting, as Iran is the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism. Oh, and of course they have drought: a goodly chunk is and has been desert.

Two years ago when I spoke of WAVE (World Against Violence and Extremism), I had both of these disasters and their mutual impact in mind. Terrorists tend to grow and thrive in lands that are deprived and damaged by environmental disasters and easily pour across borders like haze. Terrorist groups crush the sustainable development goals. And the continuation of this situation results in further poverty and environmental destruction. Not only have terrorism and violence damaged the environment, but also they have taken sustainable development out of the agenda of countries, forcing them to expend their national resources on fighting against insecurity.

If “terrorists crush the sustainable development goals”, why is Iran funding so many of them? One of the things he’s saying here is that fighting terrorism is taking attention, and money, away from fighting “climate change”.

The process of the past two years and the ensuing nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 has created suitable conditions for regional and international cooperation including in the field of environmental preservation. We are eager to cooperate with our neighbors to promote regional sustainable development through active environmental diplomacy, constructive relations with other countries, transfer of technology and knowhow, and participation in joint scientific activities, in order to fulfill our share in building a more sustainable world immune from environmental threats.

Oh, OK, so the whole nuclear deal is all about stopping “climate change” It’s so simple!

Warmists must be thrilled that this hardcore Islamist has the exact views they do. Actually, they probably sympathize more with Rouhani than fellow countrymen who have different views on climate change. And let’s not forget that Iran is super-enthused by the nuclear deal, which will see Iran vastly increase their pumping of fossil fuels.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Iran’s Rouhani Totally Concerned With Climate Change, Says Terrorism Gets In Way Of Solving It »

Posted in Global Warming, Iran | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Change Is Totally Not A Natural Cycle Now Or Something

By William Teach September 26, 2015 – 3:17 pm

So says climahypocrite Al Gore’s Climate Reality

I’m doing this post on my smartphone, so, no long discourse on the idiocy of the article, except to note that it utterly fails to prove that any of those ten reasons are man-caused over natural causation. The closest it gets is in almost alluding to UHI/land use. The unhinged screed does what most Warmists do: take data and simply imply, heck, demand that mankind is at fault, yet, for all that, they refuse to act like it’s a crisis in their own lives.

More: added “change” to headline, was supposed to be there in the first place. Doesn’t really change the substance being discussed, eh?

Read: Climate Change Is Totally Not A Natural Cycle Now Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 26, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a world flooded by too much carbon pollution from Other People, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Jawa Report, with a post on university snowflakes scared of string in a tree.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Say, Should We Abandon Democracy To Deal With “Climate Change”?

By William Teach September 26, 2015 – 11:14 am

I’m always amused when members of the Cult of Climastrology get upset when they are called fascists, totalitarians, authoritarians, etc. The phrase “thou dost protest too much” (which comes from “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”), typically overused and meant to put the opponent on the defensive, is very much valid in this case. They say they just want to fix things, but, no, no, they don’t want to get rid of capitalism and democracy. Then they push doing just that, sometimes in a “just wondering” method. Such as

If Democracy Can’t Respond to Climate Change, Should We Abandon Democracy?

Climate change or global warming — no matter what you call it, the Earth has been negatively impacted by human activity. What’s worse is that some of the world’s most powerful and influential nations are democracies that have been ineffective (at best) at combating it. By definition, a democracy is a government with power vested in the people, and yet the well-being of the people has largely been ignored when it comes to making substantial environmental legislation and reforms.

See? Democracy Bad. No mention of the environmental destruction in the Soviet Union and China, among others.

This question begs another one — do we even have a democracy if it doesn’t represent the best interest of the people? In America, we live by the creed of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” but all those rights are in jeopardy if we have food shortages, wildfires, floods, and rising seas. Leaders have been historically slow to address the climate change elephant in the room. As far back as 1965, presidential advisers warned about the dangers of elevated carbon dioxide levels, and the European Commission estimates that the continent lost 90 billion euros in flood damages alone between the years of 1980 and 2011. Still, few proactive measures have been taken by our democratic governments to confront climate change.

So, in order to have democracy, we must institute some sort of system dominated by government authority.

Beneath the historical facade of democracy lies the messy problem of how to encourage and manage effective representation for tens of millions of people. In America, a country also founded on a deep distrust of government, just a little over half of eligible voters in America show up to the polls. Complicating the issue is the problem of disproportional representation. As Yale’s Climate Connections notes about the inequities of the Senate, “584,000 people of Wyoming have the same number of votes as the 37.2 million people of California.”

Are you getting the feeling that this particular Warmist, Daphne Muller, isn’t particularly happy with equal representation, with government listening to the people rather than telling the people what to do? This is why Progressivism is termed “nice fascism”: government tells you what to do for your own good.

There’s also a good reason why tiny Wyoming has the same representation as big California, at least till the 17th Amendment messed that up. But, hey, that’s a different discussion. And, Warmists do not care, because they want an all-controlling centralized government. Here’s another phrase they should consider: “be careful what you wish for. You might get it”.

Read: Say, Should We Abandon Democracy To Deal With “Climate Change”? »

Posted in Global Warming, Progressive Goals | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

What Percent Of Global Surface Temperature Data Is “Estimated”?

By William Teach September 26, 2015 – 8:02 am

Over at Watts Up With That?, guest writer John Goetz tells us (via Public Secrets)

As the debate over whether or not this year will be the hottest year ever burns on, it is worth revisiting a large part of the data used to make this determination: GHCN v3.

The charts in this post use the dataset downloaded at approximately 2:00 PM on 9/23/2015 from the GHCN FTP Site.

The monthly GHCN V3 temperature record that is used by GISS undergoes an adjustment process after quality-control checks are done. The adjustments that are done are described at a high-level here.

The adjustments are somewhat controversial, because they take presumably raw and accurate data, run it through one or more mathematical models, and produce an estimate of what the temperature might have been given a set of conditions. For example, the time of observation adjustment (TOB) takes a raw data point at, say 7 AM, and produces an estimate of what the temperature might have been at midnight. The skill of that model is nearly impossible to determine on a monthly basis, but it is unlikely to be consistently producing a result that is accurate to the 1/100th degree that is stored in the record.

A simple case in point. The Berlin-Tempel station (GHCN ID 61710384000) began reporting temperatures in January, 1701 and continues to report them today. Through December, 1705 it was the only station in the GHCN record reporting temperatures. Forty-eight of the sixty possible months during that time period reported an unflagged (passed quality-control checks) raw average temperature, and the remaining 12 months reported no temperature. Every one of those 48 months was estimated downward by the adjustment models exactly 0.14 C. In January, 1706 a second station was added to the network – De Bilt (GHCN ID 63306260000). For the next 37 years it reported a valid temperature every month and in most of those months it was the only GHCN station reporting a temperature. The temperature for each one of those months was estimated downward by exactly 0.03 C.

Is it possible that the models skillfully estimated the “correct” temperature at those two stations over the course of forty plus years using just two constants? Anything is possible, but it is highly unlikely.

Let’s not forget that 95% of the models failed to predict the Pause. The majority of models tend to be wrong, hence the reason members of the Cult of Climastrology are using the models to predict doom in 2050 and 2100.

Mr. Goetz provides lots of charts and data, leading to the conclusion

Overall, from 1880 to the present, approximately 66% of the temperature data in the adjusted GHCN temperature data consists of estimated values produced by adjustment models, while 34% of the data are raw values retained from direct measurements. The rural split is 60% estimated, 40% retained. The non-rural split is 68% estimated, 32% retained. Total non-rural measurements outpace rural measurements by a factor of 3x.

That’s right, 66% percent is estimated. We shouldn’t forget that not everywhere has actual measuring stations. A goodly chunk of Siberia, the Arctic, Antarctica, Greenland, Africa have none. The number of ground stations has declined, especially rural ones, which give a much better real value than those in more suburban/urban areas, which are susceptible to UHI/land use. Of course, there are massive adjustments applied to the rural ones, mostly up. Hence the reason the satellite data is so important. And what do the satellites show? A pause/slight uptick over the last 12-26 years. RSS shows an almost 19 year pause.

Warming itself is not proof of anything other than the Earth being in a Holocene warm period. Creating estimated values, ones that are seemingly much higher than reality, is a way of creating alarm that this is all Mankind’s fault. Junk science.

Read: What Percent Of Global Surface Temperature Data Is “Estimated”? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

United Nations Is Totally Psyched To Push For Internet Censorship

By William Teach September 26, 2015 – 7:14 am

Is it any surprise that a body full of full on dictators and hardcore Progressives (nice fascists) would be thrilled with Internet censorship? The question, though, is “what do they want to censor?”

(Breitbart) So, what sort of content does the UN want to censor? ISIS recruitment videos, perhaps, which lure women into lives of rape and servitude? Live-streamed executions from Syria? Revenge porn or snuff videos? There’s no shortage of dangerous and potentially traumatising content on the web, after all, much of it disproportionately affecting women.

Alas not. The UN is hung up on “cyber violence against women,” a Kafkaesque term that is apparently shorthand for “women being criticised on the internet.” At least, that’s how at least two attendees at the launch of the UN report, published by the United Nations Broadband Commission, explained it yesterday.

According to feminist culture critic Anita Sarkeesian, who spoke at the event, online “harassment” doesn’t simply consist of what is “legal and illegal,” but “also the day-to-day grind of ‘you’re a liar’ and ‘you suck,’ including all of these hate videos that attack us on a regular basis.”

Unable to prove that they are the victims of a wave of “misogynistic hate” – no bomb threat against a feminist critic of video games has ever been deemed credible and there are serious doubts about threats supposedly leveled at transsexual activist Brianna Wu – feminists are trying to redefine violence and harassment to include disobliging tweets and criticisms of their work.

Are there nasty things on the Internet? Of course! Each and every one of us has certainly had nasty things aimed at them, or read nasty things. Most of us are like Tim

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/642115665357352960

Where is this coming from?

In a report released yesterday, entitled “Cyber Violence Against Women And Girls: A Global Wake-up Call,” UN Women, the group behind last year’s risible “He for She” campaign, called on governments to use their “licensing prerogative” to ensure that “telecoms and search engines” are only “allowed to connect with the public” if they “supervise content and its dissemination.”

In other words, if search engines and ISPs don’t comply with a list of the UN’s censorship demands, the UN wants national governments to cut off their access to the public.

The report puts it in an oh-so-responsible manner, but, at the end of the day, this is about government control of thought. Yes, credible threats should be taken seriously, and should be reported. These are very rare, though. And, should apply to all. This is like the #BlackLivesMatter crew, who get very upset when anyone says #AllLivesMatter. They aren’t worried about anyone but themselves.

Let’s face it: many women invite abuse on the Internet in the same manner many men do. “As the ancient Tibetan Philosophy states “Don’t start none, won’t be none!””

It is interesting that in a world being pushed far to the Left, this type of “cyber-bullying”, in quotations because it isn’t actually the real type of cyber-bullying, has seemingly become more prevalent. Liberals kept telling us that there was nothing wrong with performing in pornography, that the actresses were “sex workers”, and worthy of respect, then they got really upset that people watched porn and masturbated to it. In the same way, they enable the wild and out-of-control (seriously, which political persuasion is mostly teaching kids?) Internet, then get upset when people are wild and out-of-control?

You’d think UN Women would have more pressing concerns than porn, video games, and “cyber violence.” After all, Saudi Arabia, a country with a real violence against women problem, was recently selected to chair a key human rights panel elsewhere in the sprawling UN ecosystem. But ethical priorities don’t seem to be the UN’s strong suit.

It can be pointless and pedantic to play what some of us call “Oppression Olympics,” but in this case the discrepancy between this UN group’s complaints and the real suffering of women is too great to ignore. In a world afflicted by female genital mutilation, forced marriages and acid attacks on girls whose only crime is wanting an education, the UN has chosen to focus on the professional whinging of privileged and mendacious western activists.

However, if you point this out you will be deemed anti-women, misogynistic, part of the patriarchy, etc and so on.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: United Nations Is Totally Psyched To Push For Internet Censorship »

Posted in UN, Unhinged Tools | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

As Pope Pushes Hotcoldwetdry, Remember, Only A Minority Give A Damn

By William Teach September 25, 2015 – 5:50 pm

A bit of a flashback from Pew Research Center

Pope Francis is generally popular around the world, but when he highlights the global effects of climate change Friday at the United Nations General Assembly, he may get a lukewarm reception from many Americans and Europeans.

Global climate change was the top-rated threat in a 40-nation Pew Research Center survey conducted in spring 2015 – a median of 46% say they are “very concerned” about climate change.

But concern about climate change is relatively low in the United States and Europe. A median of 42% among both Europeans and Americans reports being very concerned about the issue. 

And in the U.S., partisan differences are stark. A majority of Democrats (62%) say they are very concerned about climate change, compared with just 20% of Republicans.

Concern for “climate change” is primarily a second/third world nation concern, excepting India and China, who, really, mostly have non-first world living standards. And, all the Cult of Climastrology can get for 25 years of spreading awareness and doom is a measly 46% globally being “very concerned”.

Read: As Pope Pushes Hotcoldwetdry, Remember, Only A Minority Give A Damn »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | Comments Off on As Pope Pushes Hotcoldwetdry, Remember, Only A Minority Give A Damn | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 25, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to desert encroaching on forest, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Public Secrets, with a post on poverty, the welfare state, and the failure of centralized government.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Friday Fun: What’s The Dumbest Way You’ve Hurt Yourself?

By William Teach September 25, 2015 – 12:04 pm

The Chive is running a pictorial on the dumbest way you’ve hurt yourself (I’m sure swiped from another site), and this I can relate to. I rarely get sick, I’m not a klutz, I don’t take stupid risks, but, I do manage to hurt myself in imaginative ways.

Let’s see, there was the time I thought I broke my leg “going over the falls,” which is when you decide not to take a wave and sit up, whereby the wave is now dragging you by the legs. Landed on the skeg hard enough to break it off, had such a huge knot on my leg I didn’t know I was also cut. Still went out surfing the next day with a backup board and a lot of stretching.

But, that’s more of an accident. How about when I broke my big toe and chipped it slipping on paper towels on the carpet while wearing socks?

Accidently leaned into pipe between engine and exhaust pipe on moped, very bad burn?

Nearly broke my elbow when I decided to vacuum the filter vent while replacing the filter. Was going to kneel on a barstool. Missed it by half an inch, had a portable vacuum in one hand, slide open laundry doors on left. All weight landed on left arm. Sprained for weeks.

Oh, I know, there was the time I was unlocking my Trans Am trunk, turned my head, and knocked myself out. Well, technically, blame the girlfriend who asked my a question causing me to turn my head.

I once gave myself massive carpel tunnel in two fingets after working on a graphic on laptop pad.

I’m definitely accident prone, but most are really unforced errors. Consider, though, the time I sat on the beach all day with some friends, reading and napping, since no waves. Was so badly sunburned, even though just at Easter time, that I turned purple. No lie. That competes for dumbest with what I refer to as the attack of the moving barstool.

What ya got?

Read: Friday Fun: What’s The Dumbest Way You’ve Hurt Yourself? »

Posted in Good Move Slick | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Dems block Cruz on naming street after Chinese activist

By William Teach September 25, 2015 – 10:14 am

Democrats prefer the side of the Chinese regime over human rights

(The Hill) Democrats on Thursday blocked a push by Sen. Ted Cruz to rename the street in front of the Chinese Embassy in Washington after a Chinese dissident.

The Texas Republican, who is running for president, tried to get unanimous consent to pass a resolution that would name the street in front of the embassy “Liu Xiaobo Plaza” after Liu Xiaobo, a human rights activist currently imprisoned in China. It would also make the embassy’s address  “1 Liu Xiaobo Plaza.”

Dems didn’t want to embarrass China’s dictator. Senator Feinstein had a little hissy fit, to which Cruz responded

“I, for one, think as Americans we should not be troubled by embarrassing communist oppressors, and I would note — as the senior senator from California leaves the floor — that this is not an issue that is abstract to me. My family, like Dr. Liu, has been imprisoned by oppressive regimes.”

For all their talk about human rights, Democrats will typically side with the oppressors.

Read: Dems block Cruz on naming street after Chinese activist »

Posted in Democrats | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove