If All You See…

By William Teach September 3, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a reflection of the desertification of the world from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on over half of immigrant families being on some sort of welfare.

Read: If All You See… »

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

We Could Be Totally Doomed By A “Gray Swan” Hurricane ‘Cause Climate Change

By William Teach September 3, 2015 – 10:07 am

I know you were asking “hey, where’s today’s scary story? I want a scary story!” Here ya go

A ‘gray swan’ hurricane could be worse than anything we’ve ever seen

Ten years ago, Hurricane Katrina topped the list of the worst storms to ever hit the US when it triggered a 28-foot-tall storm surge that swept over Mississippi and broke a levee that flooded New Orleans.

But even with all that destruction, Katrina is not the worst storm that could have hit the US.

In a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change, researchers simulated thousands of hurricanes that could hit sometime in the next century. (snip)

Risk managers call completely unpredictable and devastating storms “black swans,” but in this paper, the researchers are describing devastating storms that are actually predictable, and they’ve ominously named them “gray swans.”

What does all this mean? Essentially, they’re saying that because of anthropogenic climate change, the seas are rising faster and faster (a fable, by the way), and we’re soon, well, in the future, going to see these monster hurricanes, including hitting the places that do not usually get hit or suffer from hurricanes typically. Total doom.

Why are they pushing this? Well, because hurricane landfalls have significantly decreased since the time we were told that the big season of 2005 was the “new normal”. It’s been over 9 years since a major hurricane hit the US. Since 2008 the US has only seen no more than two barely-a-hurricanes make landfall, and it can be argued with data that neither was a hurricane at landfall. Superstorm Sandy was supposed to be the next “new normal”. None since.

Eventually, though, the Atlantic hurricane climate will flip, as it always does, and hurricanes making landfall will become prevalent again. All the prognostications from the Cult of Climastrology now will allow they to say “see? We told you so!” when that happens, despite this always happening, and fools and brain-dead Warmists will believe them.

The authors point out that these hypothetical storms are all extreme cases, but understanding the risks is critical when we start planning things like future city infrastructure. It also drives home the point of how devastating climate change may be if allowed to run amok.

There you go. Doom.

Read: We Could Be Totally Doomed By A “Gray Swan” Hurricane ‘Cause Climate Change »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Will Hillary’s Email Shenanigans Burn The White House?

By William Teach September 3, 2015 – 8:16 am

That’s the question Commentary’s John R. Schindler poses

Hillary Clinton’s email problems are already causing headaches for her presidential campaign. But within American counterintelligence circles, there’s a mounting sense that the former Secretary of State may not be the only Obama administration official in trouble. This is a scandal that has the potential to spread to the White House, as well. (snip)

EmailGate has barely touched the White House directly, although it’s clear that some senior administration officials beyond the State Department were aware of Hillary’s unorthodox email and server habits, given how widely some of the emails from Clinton and her staff were forwarded around the Beltway. Obama’s inner circle may not be off-limits to the FBI for long, however, particularly since the slipshod security practices of certain senior White House officials have been a topic of discussions in the Intelligence Community for years.

Hillary Clinton was far from the only senior Obama appointee to play fast and loose with classified materials, according to Intelligence Community insiders. While most counterspies agree that Hillary’s practices—especially using her own server and having her staffers place classified information into unclassified emails, in violation of Federal law—were especially egregious, any broad-brush investigation into security matters are likely to turn up other suspects, they maintain.

Where does all this go? No one is sure at this time. What will the FBI find? What will Congressional investigators find? Will the highly politicized Department of Justice quash the FBI and any potential charges?

This is a serious issue, and the lack of transparency and the slow-walking of the investigation smacks of an attempt to minimize the damage to Hillary and the Obama administration, much in the way the Nixon WH attempted to minimize Watergate. And it is serious, regardless of what Liberals claime

(Washington Times) One of the most serious potential breaches of national security identified so far by the intelligence community inside Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private emails involves the relaying of classified information concerning the movement of North Korean nuclear assets, which was obtained from spy satellites.

Multiple intelligence sources who spoke to The Washington Times, solely on the condition of anonymity, said concerns about the movement of the North Korean information through Mrs. Clinton’s unsecured server are twofold.

First, spy satellite information is frequently classified at the top-secret level and handled within a special compartment called Talent-Keyhole. This means it is one of the most sensitive forms of intelligence gathered by the U.S.

Second, the North Koreans have assembled a massive cyberhacking army under an elite military spy program known as Bureau 121, which is increasingly aggressive in targeting systems for hacking, especially vulnerable private systems. The North Koreans, for instance, have been blamed by the U.S. for the hack of Sony movie studios.

Again, if Hillary was a Republican, Democrats would be screaming for her head on a silver platter (and, yes, Republicans would be calling for her to drop out of the race, and face charges). Democrats, though, will ignore all rules of law in order to obtain power.

Read: Will Hillary’s Email Shenanigans Burn The White House? »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Post: Republicans Have A Duty To Force Debate On Iran Deal

By William Teach September 3, 2015 – 8:00 am

On one hand, you have the NY Times lauding Obama for his “coordinated strategy” in obtaining the 34th Democratic Senator’s support in order to make sure that any vote in favor of defeating the Iran deal can be squashed by veto. On the other you have the NY Post, in which their Editorial Board calls this a hollow victory

Obama’s political win on the Iran deal is a hollow victory

By enlisting Barbara Mikulski as the 34th Senate vote for his disastrous nuclear deal with Iran, enough to sustain his veto of a resolution of disapproval, President Obama has scored a political victory — but a hollow one.

That’s because his agreement, the most important foreign-policy measure in decades, will take effect with the support of only a third of Congress — and a similar minority of the American people.

The president won’t win approval of his odious deal; a majority of Congress remains firmly opposed. He’s simply manipulated the process by demonizing his opponents as warmongers.

Yes, Obama’s rallied enough Democrats to back him in a show of blind partisan loyalty. But his “supporters” all stress their serious misgivings on the deal.

As the editorial notes, no one, save Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, and the rulers in Tehran are enthusiastic about it. Save perhaps a few clueless and blindly partisan Democratic Party supporters, who want to burnish Obama’s legacy, forgetting all the negatives which will kick in when Obama is out of office.

As House Speaker John Boehner noted, getting just enough Democrats to help him put over a bad deal, over the objections of a solid majority of Americans, is no victory.

If Democrats insist on this charade on the American people, Republicans have a duty to force them to debate the issue — and put themselves squarely on record.

Sadly, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell seems disinclined to acquiesce to the implementing the nuclear option, ie, requiring a simple majority vote on the issue, which would force the Democrats to either filibuster or engage in actual debate. The NY Post’s editorial board was among those who have already recommended McConnell implement the nuclear option for this issue. If Democrats did it when it came to Obama judicial nominees, it would be appropriate to implement the option for something as important as the Iran deal.

The People deserve a debate and a vote in the Senate.

Meanwhile, Jonathan S. Tobin says Democrats own this deal

But the most important point to be gleaned from Obama’s seeming triumph is that he and his party now bear complete responsibility for Iran’s good conduct as well as its nuclear program. (snip)

But what this means is that every act of Iranian terror, every instance of Hamas and Hezbollah using Iranian funds and material to wage war against Israel or moves against Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states must now be seen as having been enabled not just by Obama but also by his party.

If Iran cheats its way to a bomb before the deal expires or uses the wealth that Obama is lavishing on it to get them to agree to this deal to undermine regional stability it won’t be possible in the future for Democrats to say that this was simply Obama’s folly. No, by docilely following his lead for a deal that few of them were eager to embrace, the entire Democratic Party must now pray that the president is right and that Iran will seek to “get right with the world” rather than pursuing a religious and ideological agenda of conflict with the West and Israel.

Every Democrat in Congress needs to be put on record with a vote. Republicans have a duty to force a vote.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Post: Republicans Have A Duty To Force Debate On Iran Deal »

Posted in Barry Obama, Democrats, Iran | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Murder Rates Rise In Mostly Democratic Party Run Cities

By William Teach September 2, 2015 – 3:22 pm

This is what happens when Leftist policies are not only weak on crime, but condone and defend the criminals

Murder Rates Rising Sharply in Many U.S. Cities

Cities across the nation are seeing a startling rise in murders after years of declines, and few places have witnessed a shift as precipitous as this city. With the summer not yet over, 104 people have been killed this year — after 86 homicides in all of 2014.

More than 30 other cities have also reported increases in violence from a year ago. In New Orleans, 120 people had been killed by late August, compared with 98 during the same period a year earlier. In Baltimore, homicides had hit 215, up from 138 at the same point in 2014. In Washington, the toll was 105, compared with 73 people a year ago. And in St. Louis, 136 people had been killed this year, a 60 percent rise from the 85 murders the city had by the same time last year.

Law enforcement experts say disparate factors are at play in different cities, though no one is claiming to know for sure why murder rates are climbing. Some officials say intense national scrutiny of the use of force by the police has made officers less aggressive and emboldened criminals, though many experts dispute that theory.

There are all sorts of excuses, but, one thing that’s not mentioned is that the majority of these homicides, shootings, and attempted murders involve Blacks. Yes, yes, I know liberals will immediate screech “raaaaacism!!!!!’ But, facts do not lie. One has to ask why Liberals are not only not concerned by the high violent crime rates within the Black community, but why they seemingly defend Blacks killing each other off? Why they deflect attention away from this. Do they just not care? One can even stretch and think that Liberals want Blacks to kill each other off. They’ve obtained a situation where Blacks live in high concentrations in liberal cities, and vote Democratic Party at a rate that would make 3rd world dictators happy. All while Democratic Party policies create highly negative living conditions and high rates of violent crime.

“Everybody’s struggling out here, trying to stay afloat, with no jobs, no opportunities,” said Bethann Maclin, whose 13-year-old daughter stays mostly inside these days. “The violence won’t end. Where do you start?”

Stop voting Democrat. Stop tolerating the blamestorming of everyone else, including the police. Back law and order.

Read: Surprise: Murder Rates Rise In Mostly Democratic Party Run Cities »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 2, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…are fossil fueled vehicles making the temperature soar dozens of degrees, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Reaganite Republican, with some hump day humor.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Say, Did Hotcoldwetdry Cause Tropical Storm Erika?

By William Teach September 2, 2015 – 10:37 am

Obviously, tropical storms never happened prior to CO2 being below the safe level of 350ppm

(LA Daily News) Rescue teams are still searching for dozens of missing villagers in rural areas of the Caribbean island of Dominica, days after Tropical Storm Erika caused massive flooding and landslides.

The storm has already killed at least 20, and Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit says that number could rise as helicopters reach areas cut off by eroded roads.

Dominica was the island worst affected by the storm — which weakened over eastern Cuba on Saturday, losing its title of tropical storm after drenching Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Heavy rains could still hit parts of Florida.

In his address to the nation late Friday, Skerrit continued his call-to-action after tweeting that Dominicans are “living the effects of climate change.”

“Let us consider this disaster as a test of our ability to respond collectively, patriotically and imaginatively to the peculiar challenges of globalization and climate change that have been intensifying since the start of the 21st century,” he said.

But Dr. Michael Taylor, professor of physics at the University of the West Indies at Mona, cautions against pinpointing a single storm as an indicator of climate change. He says several factors could have contributed to Dominica’s substantial flooding and landslides.

Oh, OK, that’s good

“You have to be wary of taking one storm as a sign of what’s to come,” he says. “But a storm like this makes us sit up and pay attention. The science is supporting the fact that underlying conditions for these intense rains is a result of warming global temperatures.”

Good grief. Caribbean nations have been hit by tropical systems since before recorded history, surely. Just more scaremongering.

Read: Say, Did Hotcoldwetdry Cause Tropical Storm Erika? »

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

Federalist: Hillary Intentionally Sent Highly Classified Information Via Email

By William Teach September 2, 2015 – 8:53 am

Richard Nixon said many of the same things when Watergate was originally being slowly, slowly revealed. That didn’t work out too well for him. This is not going to work out too well for Hillary, per Sean Davis at The Federalist

Hillary Intentionally Originated And Distributed Highly Classified Information

A review of recently released e-mails shows that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly originated and distributed highly classified national security information. Clinton’s classified e-mail missives were not constrained to State Department staff, either. She also sent classified information to Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton White House operative banned by the Obama White House.

An analysis by The Federalist of e-mails released by the State Department late Monday shows that scores of e-mails sent by Clinton contained highly confidential national security information from the beginning, even if they weren’t marked by a classification authority until later.

The original date of classification of Hillary’s e-mails can be discerned by noting the declassification dates noted next to redactions in the e-mails. Under a 2009 executive order signed by President Barack Obama, classified material in most circumstances is to be automatically declassified after 10 years. In some instances, that duration may be extended up to 25 years. In certain circumstances, classification authorities may adjust the classification duration based on the nature of the underlying information.

Many of the emails were mostly or completely redacted, hence, classified and/or confidential business. Some of it deals with foreign affairs, information that, while not “classified”, is not meant for open dissemination. And there are many, many examples, which can be seen at the Federalist.

These are exactly the kinds of things which would, at a minimum, cause a lower level federal employee to lose their security clearance. They could further be fined and/or prosecuted. Even jailed. Will Hillary be held to the same standard?

Let’s not forget that Democrats fantasized about Karl Rove being frogmarched out of the White House in handcuffs over the release of Valerie Plame’s name, of George Bush being impeached, despite Plame not being a field operative for the CIA, and her husband telling people that she worked for the CIA. Here you have Hillary breaking the law, not too mention intentionally doing everything she could to avoid oversight and freedom of information act requests.

Read: Federalist: Hillary Intentionally Sent Highly Classified Information Via Email »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Man With Giant Carbon Footprint Visits Glacier, Tells Us We’re Doomed

By William Teach September 2, 2015 – 8:35 am

As you might be aware, Mr. Obama took a long, fossil fueled trip to Alaska to complain about ‘climate change’. This has made many in the Cult of Climastrology squee, and proclaim the doom, such as the NY Times Editorial Board, which focuses on Obama proclaiming that “we’re not acting fast enough”, that the message is urgent, and, hey, look, this glacier is melting!!!, because Obama took a fossil fueled automobile convoy, then on fossil fueled helicopter, followed by a trip on a fossil fueled boat for a nice photo op

(Washington Post) President Obama has often complained that Congress moves at a glacial pace, and on Tuesday saw a glacier that might be moving a bit faster than some pieces of legislation.

Standing near the foot of the Exit Glacier, which has receded 1.25 miles since 1815 and 187 feet last year alone, Obama said “this is as good of a signpost of what we’re dealing with it comes to climate change as just about anything.”

It was the second day of a trip melding a warning message about climate change and visits to some of the nation’s most beautiful spots. In front of a gravelly creek bed, he said that when glaciers retreat, the water runs down and raises sea levels, altering the flora and fauna of the park.

“It is spectacular though,” he said, sporting his aviator sunglasses. “We want to make sure that our grandkids can see this.” Earlier he said it “beats being in the office.”

The president traveled here by helicopter from Anchorage and, dressed in hiking shoes, black slacks and a greenish-gray Under Armour jacket, he went on to take a short hike up to the face of Exit Glacier, a massive two-mile-long ice block that flows down from the larger Harding Icefield.

Our grandparents, and possibly even our great-great grandparents witnessed Exit Glacier retreating, well before CO2 was above the “unsafe” level of 350ppm. Consider this from the National Park Service (via Real Climate Science)

Exit Glacier advanced from the Harding Icefield during the Little Ice Age, burying this existing forest and advancing to a maximum marked by the terminal moraine dated to 1815. With the warming trend of the 1800s, Exit Glacier began to retreat from its 1815 maximum. Very slowly, the glacier retreated 230 feet (70 m) from 1815 to 1889, averaging about 3.1 ft/year (1 m/yr) (see Table 1). The glacier then retreated much more rapidly between 1889-1899, interspersed with periods of stagnation, which are marked by linear moraines (1889, 1891, 1894 and 1899). During this time, the glacier retreated 1680 ft (512 m), about 168 ft/yr (51 m/yr). The next fifteen years was a period of a slow but steady retreat, as the g lacier retreated only 42 ft/yr (13 m/yr). In the years between 1914 and 1917, Exit Glacier experienced its most rapid retreat. In just 3 years, the glacier retreated 908 ft (277 m) or almost a foot per day. From 1917 to 1973, Exit Glacier continued to retreat with periods of slow to moderate retreat. There were five periods of retreat, with the ice melting fastest between 1961 and 1968 (115 ft/yr or 35 m/yr).

Let’s see that in chart form

Interestingly, 1961-1968 was a period of cooling, a “Pause” during the Modern Warm Period. How did all that melt occur before everyone had a fossil fueled vehicle, before washers and dryers, refrigerators and icemakers, hair dryers, air conditioning, and so much more became normal in American households?

In fact, in some of the most recent years, some of the glaciers in the Hartfield Ice Mass, of which Exit Glacier is part of, have shown growth. Regardless, melting glaciers is something one would expect during a Holocene warm period. There’s virtually nothing anthropogenic about it. I say “virtually nothing”, because Mankind does have a small effect, some of it global, some of it in the realm of land use/Urban Heat Island Effect.

Oh, by the way, Washington Post writer Stephen Stromberg is proclaiming Obama is not a hypocrite for yammering about Hotcoldwetdry while allowing new drilling in the Arctic (I never got around to posting the article on this), as several Warmist groups are saying. No mention, though, of him being a massive hypocrite for his fossil fueled travel and massive carbon footprint.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Man With Giant Carbon Footprint Visits Glacier, Tells Us We’re Doomed »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Barry Obama, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | Comments Off on Man With Giant Carbon Footprint Visits Glacier, Tells Us We’re Doomed | Trackback URL

Climate Change Means The Death Of Our World And Start Of Another Or Something

By William Teach September 1, 2015 – 3:54 pm

Another day, another scary fable. Many within the Cult of Climastrology have recommended, even pleaded, that Warmists stop with the horror stories of future doom. Don’t expect the Cult to listen, despite the failure to move the needle

Climate Change Means One World’s Death and Another’s Birth

A FEW YEARS ago in a lab in Panama, Klaus Winter tried to conjure the future. A plant physiologist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, he planted seedlings of 10 tropical tree species in small, geodesic greenhouses. Some he allowed to grow in the kind of environment they were used to out in the forest, around 79 degrees Fahrenheit. Others, he subjected to uncomfortably high temperatures. Still others, unbearably high temperatures—up to a daily average temperature of 95 F and a peak of 102 F. That’s about as hot as Earth has ever been.

It’s also the kind of environment tropical trees have a good chance of living in by the end of this century, thanks to climate change. Winter wanted to see how they would do.

Seriously, they are stating that there’s a good chance of a 15+F increase in temperatures within 84 years, despite there only being a 1.4F increase since 1850.

The rest of the article is equally as doomy.

Read: Climate Change Means The Death Of Our World And Start Of Another Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove