…is changes to the human physiology due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Real Science, with a post on Antarctic temperature fraud.
This is Rachel Nichols week, due to the last season of Continuum having started Friday.
BTW, my favorite shows, excluding things on networks like Smithsonian, Cooking, Food, Travel, History, etc, are Continuum, Defiance (hoping for renewal), Killjoys, Dark Matter (last two renewed), Suits, and Graceland.
Read: If All You See… »
Happy Sunday! Another great day in America, with Halloween right around the corner…wait, it isn’t? Huh. Why all the stuff in stores? Anyhow, this is supposedly by Ted Withers, supposedly because is a bit different from his other stuff, with a wee bit of help.
What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15
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 »
Have we finally reached Peak Warmist, where the Cult of Climastrology has utterly and completely jumped the shark? Well, now that you ask, no. In most other parts of life, the answer would be a resounding “yes”, but, we are talking about the CoC, and there will always be something nuttier and/or more offensive around the corner. Here’s Timothy Snyder in the Sunday Review
BEFORE he fired the shot, the Einsatzgruppe commander lifted the Jewish child in the air and said, “You must die so that we can live.†As the killing proceeded, other Germans rationalized the murder of Jewish children in the same way: them or us.
Today we think of the Nazi Final Solution as some dark apex of high technology. It was in fact the killing of human beings at close range during a war for resources. The war that brought Jews under German control was fought because Hitler believed that Germany needed more land and food to survive and maintain its standard of living — and that Jews, and their ideas, posed a threat to his violent expansionist program.
Two things. High technology? Not quite what I think of in the extermination of 6 million Jews, not too mention all the other groups slaughtered by Hitler and his minions. Nor do most people.
Second, resources? A very weird rewrite of history. Only in Warmist World would we get that disgusting and off-base (did I mention disgusting?) rationale, but, that’s because it is meant to fit into a Narrative
The Holocaust may seem a distant horror whose lessons have already been learned. But sadly, the anxieties of our own era could once again give rise to scapegoats and imagined enemies, while contemporary environmental stresses could encourage new variations on Hitler’s ideas, especially in countries anxious about feeding their growing populations or maintaining a rising standard of living.
This is all caused by “climate change”, of course!
The quest for German domination was premised on the denial of science. Hitler’s alternative to science was the idea of Lebensraum. Germany needed an Eastern European empire because only conquest, and not agricultural technology, offered the hope of feeding the German people. In Hitler’s “Second Book,†which was composed in 1928 and not published until after his death, he insisted that hunger would outstrip crop improvements and that all “the scientific methods of land management†had already failed.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, that does sure seem like notions that have been pushed for quite some time by wacko enviroweenies and the Cult of Climastrology, do they not?
Climate change threatens to provoke a new ecological panic. So far, poor people in Africa and the Middle East have borne the brunt of the suffering.
The mass murder of at least 500,000 Rwandans in 1994 followed a decline in agricultural production for several years before. Hutus killed Tutsis not only out of ethnic hatred, but to take their land, as many genocidaires later admitted.
Again, another rewrite of history, attempting to link it to climate change causing agricultural problems. The UN Human Rights Commission, along with everyone not bat guano insane, disagrees.
The risk is that a developed country able to project military power could, like Hitler’s Germany, fall into ecological panic, and take drastic steps to protect its existing standard of living.
Huh. If that happened, it would be Left wing Warmists taking those drastic steps.
And here we go
Hitler spread ecological panic by claiming that only land would bring Germany security and by denying the science that promised alternatives to war. By polluting the atmosphere with greenhouse gases, the United States has done more than any other nation to bring about the next ecological panic, yet it is the only country where climate science is still resisted by certain political and business elites. These deniers tend to present the empirical findings of scientists as a conspiracy and question the validity of science — an intellectual stance that is uncomfortably close to Hitler’s.
And there you have it: if you follow the Scientific Method, if you want scientists to be honest, if you want them to follow long established scientific principles, if you have a problem with falsified/adjusted data, if you want to see the raw data, well, hey, you are almost Hitler!
Even though Hitler shared most of the same views and political ideology as today’s Progressives.
Today we confront the same crucial choice between science and ideology that Germans once faced. Will we accept empirical evidence and support new energy technologies, or allow a wave of ecological panic to spread across the world?
Denying science imperils the future by summoning the ghosts of the past.
So, if you refuse to join the CoC, you’re the ghost of Hitler. This is all about shutting down debate, demonizing one’s opponents in the most horrific manner. Someone else did that back in the 1930’s and 1940’s. I wonder who?
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: NY Times: Climate Deniers Have “an intellectual stance that is uncomfortably close to Hitler’s” »
…is a horrendous energy sucking stadium, which brings tens of thousands in fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on falling Ocare numbers.
Read: If All You See… »
This should send shivers of defeat through the bodies of all Republicans
(Politico) Top Republican lawmakers are planning a wide-ranging offensive — including outreach to foreign officials by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office — to undermine President Barack Obama’s hopes of reaching an international climate change agreement that would cement his environmental legacy.
The GOP strategy, emerging after months of quiet discussions, includes sowing doubts about Obama’s climate policies at home and abroad, trying to block key environmental regulations in Congress, and challenging the legitimacy of the president’s attempts to craft a global agreement without submitting a treaty to the Senate.
A top policy aide to McConnell (R-Ky.) has had conversations with a select group of representatives from foreign embassies to make it clear that Republicans intend to fight Obama’s climate agenda at every turn, sources familiar with the efforts say.
This is the same McConnell who essentially surrendered to Obama on the Iran deal, rather than fighting on. This is the same McConnell who has consistently surrendered to Obama and the Democrats. I have zero confidence that he won’t do the same here.
McConnell himself warned foreign leaders last spring to “proceed with caution before entering into a binding, unattainable deal†with Obama, noting that “two-thirds of the U.S. federal government” — Congress and the Supreme Court — hasn’t signed off on the president’s plans.
McConnell has about the same credibility as Obama does on foreign policy: none. The majority of Americans are against the Iran deal, wanted the Senate to vote on it, and wanted the Senate to kill the deal. McConnell washed his hands of the whole affair. Why wouldn’t we think he would do the same with anything that comes out of the Paris “climate change” meetings?
Is this the latest excuse from the Cult of Climastrology? Or an acknowledgement that science can change when scientists do science things? Both?
Breathe in, breathe out, in, out… Like a giant lung, the Southern Ocean seasonally absorbs vast amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and releases it back later in the year. But on an annual average the seas surrounding Antarctica absorb significantly more CO2 than they release. Most importantly, these seas remove a large part of the CO2 that human activities emit into the atmosphere, thereby slowing down the growth of this greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, lessening the rate of climate change. Although the Southern Ocean represents no more than a quarter of the total surface of the world’s oceans, it accounts for 40 percent of the global oceanic uptake of that human-made CO2.
Well, that’s a heck of a thing
From the year 2005, however, scientists pointed out that the Southern Ocean carbon sink might have begun to “saturate.” Based on model results, they suggested that it had not increased since the late 1980s. This was unexpected as one had assumed that a direct relationship existed between the magnitude of the carbon sink and the concentration of atmospheric CO2: the higher the concentration of CO2 in the air, the greater the amount of CO2 absorbed by the sea.
Whoops, 97% settled-consensus totally wrong again: "Upswing in absorption of CO2 in Southern Ocean over last decade" http://t.co/d6SBHntBnC
— hockey schtick (@hockeyschtick1) September 10, 2015
Of course, we will soon be told that this will lead to total doom in one form or fashion. We’ll surely hear about how all the sea life WILL DIE as the Southern seas turn to battery acid from “carbon pollution.”
(Jo Nova) The Southern Ocean absorbs 40% of the global oceanic uptake in CO2. For most of the last ten years researchers thought it was weaker, or at “saturation†point and not able to absorb more CO2. Instead, it looks like it has been absorbing more again and by the year 2010 was back up to full power. This means there was a lot more natural variation than scientists (and their models) thought.The GCM’s are meant to be able to predict the oceans.
Back in 2007, New Scientist broadcast that the slowdown has “far reaching implicationsâ€, things were worse than the IPCC’s projections. Things were 20 years ahead of the IPCC’s schedule and it was “scaryâ€. Instead the IPCC was 20 years behind real life, and the models were as bad as the skeptic projected. Will New Scientist tell the world?
No. No they won’t. And the 97% crowd won’t admit their mistakes, and that their computer models fail in the real world, either.
Read: Reversed Science: Southern Seas Act As Big Carbon Sink Or Something »
Why not start Saturday off with a good chuckle?
(Fox News) President Barack Obama warned Russia on Friday against doubling down on sending support for Syrian President Bashar Assad, casting recent buildup of Russian military equipment and personnel in Syria in an effort to help prop up the embattled leader.
“The strategy they’re pursuing right now of doubling down on Assad is a mistake,” Obama said during a town hall with U.S. military personnel.
I’m surprised we didn’t something about this being a 20th Century policy or something.
Russia denies it’s trying to build up Assad’s military and instead has claimed its increased military presence is part of an international effort to help defeat the Islamic State. Russian Foreign Miniser Sergey Lavrov called on world powers to join Russia in that pursuit, arguing that Syria’s army is the most efficient force to fight extremists in the Middle East.
You cannot defeat Islamic State with air strikes only,” Lavrov said, a clear dig at the White House’s strategy. “It’s necessary to cooperate with ground troops and the Syrian army is the most efficient and powerful ground force to fight the IS.”
We all know that is somewhat BS, that this is all about supporting Assad, but, if the US and NATO allies were fighting ISIS more strongly, Russia would have no excuse. Had Obama and SoS Hillary Clinton took the side of those trying to push out Assad during the Arab Spring, rather than referring to Assad as a “reformer”, things might have been different.
Furthermore, Russia has invited the US to join them in cooperation, to make sure that there are no unintended military incidents, which, sadly, totally punks Obama and current SoS John Kerry.
Diplomats in Moscow say the Kremlin is happy for the West to believe it is building up its military in Syria, calculating that this will give it more bargaining power in any peace talks.
That’s what Reuters calls “bargaining power”. After all Russia has witness under the witless Obama/Clinton/Kerry foreign policy, they may have it.
Obama can wag his finger and yammer all he wants: Russia, like most nations, sees weakness. They saw red lines set, then Obama doing nothing but attempting to shift the burden over to Congress. They see the weakness of the Iran deal. They saw weakness when Russia invaded Ukraine. They saw weakness when Obama refused the missile system in Poland. They see “leading from behind”. The list goes on an on. Any finger wagging was surely met with laughter in Russia and Syria. Which is bad for the United States, which has been weakened tremendously under Obama/Clinton/Kerry.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Funny Story Of Day: Obama Wags Finger At Putin, Warns Against Russian Involvement In Syria »
Good news: Warmists now know exactly what they need to pay for their carbon sins
This Map Shows Who Owes the Most for Burning All That Coal
When it comes to climate change, humans can rightfully claim responsibility for most of the warming the world has seen since the Industrial Revolution.
But should all people be equally responsible for the damage done?
Not according to Concordia University researcher Damon Matthews, who calculated which countries contribute the most to climate change and which nations emit the least but nonetheless are paying the price of global warming.
Live in Australia or the United States? You owe $10,000 to $12,000 for your carbon sins. Hail from India or Brazil? You’ve got about $2,000 worth of climate credit coming your way.
Of course, what this is really about is finding a way to have countries tax citizens and redistribute the money to other nations, rather than telling Warmists they need to reduce their own evil carbon pollution footprints. It’s all about the politics and cash.
Read: “This Map Shows Who Owes the Most for Burning All That Coal” Or Something »
…is a horrible energy sucking stadium, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Washington Free Beacon, with a post on the NY Times launching its Jew tracker.
Read: If All You Se… »
Representative Lamar Smith pens a piece over at the Hill, smacking around Mr. Obama over his idiotic “climate change” policies and recent Alaskan photo-op, which includes 7 facts
1. For the past 18 years, weather satellites have not measured a global increase in temperatures although carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased over that same period. Weather satellites are the most advanced instruments for measuring global temperatures. The fact that these satellites have not detected a measureable temperature increase despite an increased concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere calls into question the correlation climate change alarmists preach between carbon emissions and temperature.
3. The natural cycle of global temperatures has resulted in both higher and lower temperatures over the past 1,000 years than exist today. These temperature fluctuations occurred before significant fossil energy use. So temperatures the Earth is experiencing now have been seen before.
4. If implemented, the Obama administration’s Climate Action Plan would reduce global temperatures by only 0.01, or one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius. President Obama’s former Deputy Secretary for Fossil Energy at the Department of Energy, Charles McConnell, said that EPA’s carbon rules will have only a minor impact on global climate change. Yet regulations will cost billions of dollars and jeopardize thousands of jobs.
7. Carbon dioxide accounts for a very small part of the Earth’s overall atmosphere and those levels have fluctuated throughout the Earth’s history. Carbon dioxide currently accounts for only .038 percent of our planet’s atmosphere. And human-made carbon dioxide only makes up about three percent of that. Put another way, if all the gases in the atmosphere were represented by the length of a football field, only the last 1/10 of an inch would be carbon emissions caused by humans. It’s hard to believe that such a small amount would supposedly have such huge consequences.
There are three more at the link. I could technically excerpt the whole thing, being from an elected official, but that would still be bad form.
Of course, facts are immaterial to th3 Cult of Climastrology, since this is all about pushing a hardcore Progressive agenda.
The EPA and other government agencies too often fail to present all the facts. Their agenda comes first, accuracy comes second. Climate change has many explanations – and unanswered questions. The American people need good science, not science fiction promoted by alarmists.
Calling it science fiction is an insult to science fiction. But, it’s nice to see elected officials finally acknowledging that this isn’t about science, but politics, and arguing in that manner, rather than trying to rebut sloppy, misleading, and false junk science.
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The Next Genocide