Warmists: Carbon Pollution Will Totally Doom Us In 20k Years

By William Teach September 16, 2015 – 2:40 pm

If we don’t leave all fossil fuels in the ground starting now…wait, I thought other Cult of Climastrology members were saying that no one was saying that?

(Takepart) Keep it in the ground. That’s the rallying cry of environmentalists who warn that burning the world’s remaining fossil fuel reserves would unleash catastrophic climate change.

That’s good advice, according to scientists who in a new study found that the carbon emissions from exhausting coal, oil, and natural gas reserves would melt the entire Antarctic ice sheet, triggering a seal level rise of 160 to 200 feet.

Doom!

The new findings are in line with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s sea-level-rise estimates, which predict a two- to three-foot sea-level rise by 2100.

But Caldeira said that the new findings show that after 2100, sea levels would increase about 10 feet over the following 100 years. That’s nearly 10 times faster than the current rate. (Snip)

Caldeira said the team took estimates under circumstances ranging from zero carbon emissions to a “burn it all” scenario—in which all 10,000 gigatons of coal, natural gas, and oil are extracted and burned over the course of 10,000 years. That worst-case scenario would lead to a global average temperature nearly 9 degrees Celsius (about 16 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than today’s temperature and much higher than the increase of 2 degrees Celsius scientists have warned we need to stay below to avoid catastrophic climate change.

The article does claim that just 6 to 8 percent could make Antarctica unstable, according to computer models. Insert snicker here.

Anyhow, 10 feet by the end of this century (not happening at current reality ) the 10 feet more per century gives us just under 20k years. Worst. Scary. Movie. Ever.

Read: Warmists: Carbon Pollution Will Totally Doom Us In 20k Years »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 16, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a sea that will rise hundreds of feet, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post on nutritional myths.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

A View Inside The Crazy Mind Of A Warmist

By William Teach September 16, 2015 – 11:18 am

Ever wonder what a Warmist is really thinking? Here’s The Atlantic’s Robinson Meyer

Not Doomed Yet: A New Newsletter About Climate Change

I remember the first time I learned about climate change. I was sitting at a fancy restaurant with my parents, reading a science magazine under the table. (I think it was Kids Discover, which—with its full-page photos, friendly writing, and cartoonish illustrations—ranked up there with the Klutz books as ’90s edutainment par excellence.) In the bottom half of a page, there was an info box: Scientists had identified something called the greenhouse effect, which could make disastrously extreme weather more common and the planet too hot to inhabit. I remember looking around the table, anxiously, before stammering out a question to my parents: Did they know about this? Humanity breaking the planet, and adults were doing nothing about it?

I have lost count of the number of people who have identified climate as “the political issue of the 21st century.” It ranks up there for me. Food, water, protection from the elements: It feels insufficient to say that climate touches everything, because it in fact permeates us. Physically, materially, existentially, the climate determines what it feels like to have a human body in this biosphere. And that means that every consideration of the future—of security personal, economic, and international—winds back to climate.

Here we go

When I consider whether to have children, I think about climate change. When I consider where I want to live, I think about climate change. When I stand on the beach and play catch with my younger brothers and wonder what their young adulthood will be like, I think of refugees and resource wars—and, thus, climate change.

Even my current career, as a technology reporter, was inflected by the climate: When I first got into technology in the mid-2000s, I was partly drawn to it because I thought all that new wealth—and all that new expertise in handling data—might flow toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change, a phenomenon without a mind, is engrained in every texture of my every ordinary day.

I think the specific psychological term for this is “Wackadoodle”.

Read: A View Inside The Crazy Mind Of A Warmist »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Glenn Beck Losing Mind Over Trump, Calls Tea Party Supporter Racists

By William Teach September 16, 2015 – 7:07 am

Personally, I rarely listen to Glenn Beck anymore. I’m tired of the old school revival feel. I tune into political programs for politics and some fun, not for religious preaching and weepiness. And, half the time the show seems to be at commercial, either regular ones or the minute long product endorsements directly from Glenn, using show time, and the several minutes of discussion that leads up to that product placement. He got in a fight with Sarah Palin last week (not that I’m a supporter of Palin anymore, but, there was no call for what Beck did), and no

(Breitbart) On Tuesday, talk radio host Glenn Beck accused the Tea Party supporters of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump of being racists.

While he questioned whether Trump’s supporters are genuine Tea Partiers, Beck said of them, “If you were a Tea Party person, then you were lying. You were lying. It was about Barack Obama being black. It was about him being a Democrat.” Although he later identified fellow talk show host Sean Hannity as a Tea Party supporter who thinks Trump is “a great guy,” Beck said that he simply disagrees with Hannity about Trump.

Beck’s comments came as part of a discussion of Trump’s rally in Texas yesterday before a sold-out crowd of 20,000. Beck stated, “The media’s making this look like [Trump’s supporters are] Tea Party people. I don’t think these are Tea Party people who are following him. Some of them may be, but I think these — I mean, you can’t — if you were a Tea Party person, then you were lying. You were lying. It was about Barack Obama being black. It was about him being a Democrat, because this guy is offering you many of the same things, as shallow as the same way. If you said to me that it bothered you about his past, you said to me, ‘Hey, what about his relationship with Jeremiah Wright? What about what he’s done here, here, and here?’ You’re not bothered by this guy, and it’s exactly the same thing.”

Of course we didn’t support in Obama in 2012 because he’s a Democrat, but no one cared that he was Black. We cared because his policies were terrible. Apparently, though, no Conservative is allowed to express even the most minor of support for Trump. We apparently cannot say we like a bit of what Trump says. Would Beck call me a Progressive if he heard that little ole’ me supports many of Obama’s actions in fighting Islamists, such as his drone strikes and use of special forces to whack Islamist jihadis?

Beck also stated, “Well, we can’t figure out, there’s a lot of people that we know, that we just cannot figure out. They say they were for the Tea Party, I mean, you know, I’ve had an open conversation with Sean Hannity. He is — he swears he’s a great guy, and everything else. I just disagree with him, on that. Sarah Palin is another one, who had him on the show, and just fell all over him, and just loves him. I don’t understand that.”

Look, we know Beck is a big Trump hater, and he has reason to be leery of Trump, but, this is completely over the line. There’s no reason for this insanity, and he’ll be losing a lot of listeners after this rant.

Let’s wonder, though, who are the real supporters of Trump? While many Conservatives/Tea Party folks enjoy some of what Trump is saying and doing, it seems like the big support is coming from your plain old Republicans. There is a difference. These tend to be the folks who do not get all that involved in much of the political debate, they are often bystanders and couldn’t necessarily describe what it means to be an American Conservative. They can get a bit squishy on policy. They can, at times, switch to voting Democrat or a third party. They want things simple: these are the bread and butter voters, those who think about their own pocket-books when voting. They think of themselves as Republican voters, not conservative voters. These seem to be the folks who are supporting Trump, rather than Tea Party folks.

Add in many Democrats who are simply Dems, not liberals or Progressives. People who can switch their vote.

Trump is taking on a big subject, illegal immigration, and saying what people want to hear. Is he legit? I have my doubts. Does he hold some Leftish positions? You bet. Is he perfect? No. Should Beck be calling those who find parts of Trump’s talking points exciting racists? No. Many people want something different from what we’ve seen from politicians, and they want someone who has a different experience. Trump has a populist message against the business as usual Washington politics.

Beck has lost it. He went on to double down by citing Rick Wilson, a big time Republican Establishment guy who has denigrated Trump supporters, who also pushed the raaaaacism meme. Thanks for the memories of a previously good show, Glenn. Can we get Neal Boortz out of retirement to take over the 9-12 time slot?

Read: Glenn Beck Losing Mind Over Trump, Calls Tea Party Supporter Racists »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

McConnell Set To Force Democrats On Tough Iran Vote

By William Teach September 16, 2015 – 6:31 am

Instead of taking the easy route and launching the nuclear option, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will attempt something different after Democrats blocked taking a vote on the Iran deal a second time

(The Hill)  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) plans to force Democrats to walk the line on the Iran nuclear agreement, teeing up a vote on a contentious amendment on the deal.

The Republican leader scheduled a procedural vote on an amendment that would block President Obama from lifting sanctions against Iran under the nuclear deal until Iran publicly supports Israel and releases Americans currently held in Iranian prisons.

That would actually be requiring Iran to say that Israel has a right to exist, and releasing the 4 Americans held.

Under Senate rules, the vote would occur Thursday, which is also the deadline for Congress to pass legislation on the Iran nuclear agreement.

The procedural hardball comes after Democrats blocked a resolution of disapproval on the deal from overcoming a procedural hurdle for a second time. Opponents of the agreement were largely expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed to move forward.

The Kentucky Republican warned Democrats ahead of Tuesday’s vote that if they blocked the resolution that he would file his amendment, saying that “my strong preference is for Democrats to simply allow an up-or-down vote on the president’s Iran deal.”

“But if they’re determined to make that impossible, then at the very least we should be able to provide some protection to Israel and long-overdue relief to Americans who’ve languished in Iranian custody for years,” he added.

Good thing Republicans pushed the Corker amendment, which turned the approval process on it’s head, eh? McConnell could have, right before attempting cloture, said “we haven’t received all material related to the Iran deal, and till Mr. Obama sends over all side deals and communications, the review period cannot start, so, there is no way the Iran deal can be implemented till that occurs, so, we won’t be taking any votes.”

“The Republican leader has threatened to us, ‘we lost and we’re going to make you suffer,'” Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said. “The Republicans have lost. They lost this measure, and we should move on to something else.”

Of course, the majority of Americans have, in almost every single poll, said they are against the Iran deal and want the Senate to shoot it down. Only in Democratic Party politics is it considered “losing” when they block the ability to vote on a major piece of foreign policy.

Forcing Democrats to filibuster the resolution would put Dems in a tough place, where most have to pretend they care about Israel. Sure, some actually do support Israel, but, most are hardcores who despise Israel.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: McConnell Set To Force Democrats On Tough Iran Vote »

Posted in Iran | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Hillary Really Wants To End Sexual Assault On Mostly Liberal College Campuses

By William Teach September 15, 2015 – 3:28 pm

She does, she really does

(MSNBC) Democratic White House hopeful Hillary Clinton added her voice Monday to the growing push to combat the scourge of sexual assault on college campuses. And she said her rival Bernie Sanders is “doing a great job.”

“It is not enough to condemn campus sexual assault. We need to end campus sexual assault,” Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, said in a speech in Cedar Falls, Iowa.

Interesting. Most colleges tend to be hotbeds of Leftism, chock full of leftist administrators and teachers, along with all the students who are leftists and are turned more leftist.

Must be something wrong with Democratic Party ideology, beliefs, and policies for so much sexual assault to propagate on college campuses, eh?

Perhaps Bored Grandma Clinton could explain how she stood up for all the sexual assaults her husband was credibly accused of.

Read: Hillary Really Wants To End Sexual Assault On Mostly Liberal College Campuses »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 15, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…are wonderful trees that are being killed by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on discussing Islam’s jihad problem.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

LAPD Looks To Make Their Fleet All Electric

By William Teach September 15, 2015 – 10:02 am

Police cars aren’t cheap. They have big engines and strong body reinforcements, made to take abuse normal models cannot take. The LAPD is bringing new meaning to “green police”

(Mashable)  A Tesla Model S is about as far from a Ford Crown Victoria as you can imagine, but the former might just replace the latter in the police fleets of the U.S.

As part of a larger effort to be more environmentally friendly, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) announced Friday that it would be leasing a Tesla Model S P85D and a BMW i3 for research into electric vehicles (EV).

The city of Los Angeles is looking to lease a total of 160 EVs, which would give it the largest city-owned EV fleet in the U.S.

Here’s what they look like

Fantastic! So, officers will have to get off the road every hour or so (maybe less) and take time to charge the cars up. Usually around 30 minutes for an 80% charge. So, that means law enforcement is unavailable to patrol or respond to calls during 1/3 to 1/2 of their shift. And, they’ll have to find charging ports around the city. Police will literally have to plan their driving day around constant recharging. Good idea!

Pit maneuver? Good luck with that. What happens if they are in an accident? Special fire department responses are needed, like with most hybrid and electric cars.

Read: LAPD Looks To Make Their Fleet All Electric »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Seattle Sued Over Use Of “Green Police”

By William Teach September 15, 2015 – 8:19 am

But, does this have any merit? Oh, and it is amusing that the uber-Progressive citizens of Seattle are suddenly upset when the far left politicians they voted in to office institute a policy that comes back and negatively effects those same citizens

(Fox News) When it comes to garbage, the city of Seattle has launched a waste war.

Nine full-time solid waste inspectors have been hired as part of a controversial program to check city trash to make sure people are recycling. Additionally, contracted waste haulers have been effectively deputized as trash police, given the authority to tag bins when people fail to recycle and compost enough.

The program is now the subject of a lawsuit, as residents fume over what some call an intrusive government program.

“I understand people have noble goals,” said Keli Carender, who got tagged two weeks in a row, an offense that soon could bring a fine. “But at some point we have to say, you can’t violate my rights to achieve this noble goal.”

Carender is among 14,000 residential and commercial customers this year to get tagged. The sticker warns them that more than 10 percent of their trash content should have been recycled or put into compost bins.

Do the residents have any protections against this?

(Is That Legal?) As a general rule, it is legally permissible to go through the trash of another person. However, there are a couple nuances worth noting. First, if the person going through the trash is a police officer or one who is acting on the behalf of a police officer, then United States Supreme Court case law is quite clear: it is legal, constitutional, and not even considered a “search.” (see California v. Greenwood, 486 US 35). The Supreme Court has consistently held that an expectation of privacy does not give rise to Fourth Amendment constitutional protection unless society is prepared to accept that expectation as objectively reasonable. Therefore, since the Court did not believe society was prepared to accept an expectation of privacy in the garbage we put out to the curb for collection as objectively reasonable, it is not unlawful for an officer or his agent to go through such trash. Second, a private citizen will not likely go to jail for simply rummaging through the trash of another person. However, if he does anything that the state he lives in finds unlawful during the course of his rummaging, he could face criminal charges, serious penalties, and even jail time.

But (back to the news article)

“The Supreme Court of Washington state went the other direction,” said Ethan Blevins, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation who filed the lawsuit. “[It] said our state Constitution provides better protection, and we believe that people expect that our garbage is going to be protected from prying eyes.”

Blevins cites a ruling in which a criminal conviction was overturned on the grounds that the police found a key piece of evidence in the suspect’s trash without first obtaining a search warrant.

So legal? Illegal? Realistically, the fines are minor, ranging from $1 to $50, and do not even start till January 1st, 2016. But, there is no appeals process, which may, in fact, violate due process proscription. Regardless, it is amusing to see the Progressives get upset when they are forced to walk the talk.

And, yes, you did read it right that Seattle has actually hired people who are drawing a salary to inspect people’s garbage.

Read: Seattle Sued Over Use Of “Green Police” »

Posted in Enviroweenies, Liberal World | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

McConnell To Hold Second Vote On Iran Deal

By William Teach September 15, 2015 – 7:56 am

Last week, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell attempted to hold a vote on a measure of disapproval for the Iran deal, which failed, as all but 4 Democrats voted to refuse to allow that vote to proceed. McConnell promised that he would hold another vote, and it looks like that is happening today

(AP) Senate Republicans will try a second time on Tuesday to move ahead on a resolution rejecting the Iran nuclear deal, and the outcome is expected to be the same: Democrats are poised to block the measure and preserve President Barack Obama’s foreign policy win.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has scheduled another vote Tuesday to end debate, but that motion is likely to be blocked by Senate Democrats as well. It’s unclear if this is the last vote the Republican-led Senate will take on the Iran nuclear deal.

Republicans now are working to craft new sanctions legislation to maintain a hardline stance against Iran. Looking ahead to next year’s elections, Republican campaign committees also have targeted Democrats who backed the deal and some organizations against the deal already have threatened to withdraw political contributions from members of Congress who backed it.

We can thank Senator Corker and feckless Republicans for setting up this situation, where, instead of the norm, where they would have to vote to approve the deal, now they have to vote to disapprove it. What did they think they would accomplish with that Corker bill? Did they think they could punk Obama and the Democrats, forcing them to vote for the Iran deal, and then have Obama veto it? Perhaps the Democrats, in voting for the Corker bill, claiming it was very important to have this debate and vote, punked McConnell.

McConnell should force actual debate on the Senate floor, rather than just attempting to get a proper vote. Put Democrats on record. See who will take the floor for this deal.

Hopefully, McConnell has a plan in taking this second vote. Perhaps, after Democrats block moving to a full vote, he will implement the nuclear option, requiring just a simple majority in order to end debate (not that there really was any last week) to move to a yes/no vote on the Iran bill.

Better yet, he should force actual debate, then, cancel any vote, saying that Mr. Obama is in violation of the Corker amendment, which Obama signed, since Obama has not submitted all the necessary material, including side deals and letters to foreign governments, as required by the Corker bill. Henceforth, the consideration period cannot start, so no sanctions can be lifted, as least involving American companies/holdings.

More than likely, McConnell will simply hold this vote, get blocked by Democrats, and then drop the subject. That’s his MO. He likes to talk tough, then surrender.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: McConnell To Hold Second Vote On Iran Deal »

Posted in GOP, Iran | Comments Off on McConnell To Hold Second Vote On Iran Deal | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove