Ride Your Bike Naked For Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach June 16, 2015 – 7:28 pm

On the bright side, at least they weren’t driving fossil fueled vehicles

(Sentinel Republic) The World Naked Bike Ride is a global protest.

Organizers instruct riders on their Facebook page to obey police but warn that those riding naked may be ticketed.

Footage posted online from the Leeside event show cyclists – some decked out in intricate body-paint designs, others cheating slightly in shorts and swimming togs – waving and cheering as they cycle, as motorists beep their support.

More than 1,000 people are expected to take part in the World Naked Bike Ride when it returns to the streets of London later today. While clothing is optional, all participants will wear helmets and lights so they can be seen on the road.

It’s supposed to be about sharing the road and seeing bicyclists and stuff, and the article doesn’t really support the headline regarding climate change. However, when you check their website, there are all sorts of wonky links to “climate change”. In the FAQs we read

What does cycling naked have to do with environmental protest?
We face automobile traffic with our naked bodies as the best way of defending our dignity and exposing the unique dangers faced by cyclists and pedestrians as well as the negative consequences we all face due to dependence on oil, and other forms of non-renewable energy.

Can we assume they ride bikes that were made only with renewable energy? And do not use any petroleum products to lubricate their bikes? And that there are no plastics on their bikes?

Read: Ride Your Bike Naked For Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

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

…is a horrible fossil fueled machine being washed with Gaia hating chemicals, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Lady Liberty 1885, with a post on a free speech hating school.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Politifact Finds That Warmist Accusation Against Scott Walker Is False

By William Teach June 16, 2015 – 11:07 am

Warmists lying? You don’t say!

(Politifact) If a website from a progressive group is to be believed, state workers in Wisconsin cannot even say the words “climate change.”

So the scottaway.com website, developed by an operation called Forecast the Facts, allows readers to click a red button on the screen and get alternative words to use, like “weather roulette” and “extended Popsicle season.”

Forecast The Facts is a far left group associated with George Soros, Think Progress, and 350.org.

Anyhow, Politifact goes through the claim, and finds

Forecast the Facts said Walker runs a state government that bans “employees from talking about climate change.”

But the group could only name one obscure agency, outside of the governor’s jurisdiction, that has such a rule in place. The rule was aimed at barring its workers from doing climate-change work while on state time. And that rule is poised to be amended. Meanwhile, we found plenty of examples where state agencies were discussing climate change.

We rate the claim False.

Surprise.

Read: Politifact Finds That Warmist Accusation Against Scott Walker Is False »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Voters Should Totally Evaluate Hillary On Her Record, Not Her Name

By William Teach June 16, 2015 – 7:18 am

Oh, wait, the WP Editorial Board is saying this about Jeb! Bush

Jeb Bush is more than a name

“I AM not going to change who I am,” Jeb Bush declared last week, in the run-up to the official kickoff of his presidential campaign on Monday. Mr. Bush couldn’t escape his most glaring personal detail — his last name — even if he wanted to. Yet for all the recent talk of family baggage and a stumbling start to his 2016 effort, Mr. Bush has a good shot at winning the Republican presidential nomination, because he is a strong conservative former swing-state governor, and of winning the general election after that, because he is the Republican presidential candidate who so far seems most interested in actually governing. It is on these and other relevant characteristics — not his name — that voters should judge him.

I’m waiting with bated breath for something similar about Hillary.

In his Monday announcement speech, Mr. Bush pitched himself as an accomplished executive responsible for a raft of conservative reforms in Florida, his adopted home. “We will get back on the side of free enterprise and free people,” he said. “I know we can fix this. Because I’ve done it.”

Mr. Bush’s record has a lot that many Republicans should like. He cut taxes, slashed the state workforce and enacted a school voucher program. He ended affirmative action at state universities and approved a “stand your ground” justifiable homicide law, a policy that’s appealing to those ideologically committed to expansive gun rights. Mr. Bush has not traded in his conservative card since, though it has meant falling behind the times on issues such as gay marriage, which he firmly opposes.

There are two points to this missive, which seems to actually support Jeb. First, it is meant to bolster his candidacy, because the Conservative base is dead set against him, and would fail to come out to vote for him, similar to Romney and McCain. As the editorial goes on to say, Bush has a big problem with Conservatives, and Republicans, when it comes to his support for amnesty for illegal aliens, Common Core, anthropogenic climate change, and a few other issues. Yes, he has a pretty good record of governance. The other issues are killers. The WPEB wants Jeb to be the GOP nominee, to lose against whichever Democrat is their candidate

The second point is to paint him as a far, far, far right Conservative, so he loses the moderates and those who are tired of the crummy policies of the Obama administration and might otherwise have voted GOP.

Mr. Bush has the time and resources to hone his operation and message. He will have to convince GOP primary voters that conservative governing, not conservative tantrum-throwing, is what their party’s leader should be committed to.

Again, when do we get something similar about Hillary? This editorial actually provided some details on Jeb!’s record. What of Hillary’s? Where is her record? What successes has she had during her time in office?

Read: Washington Post: Voters Should Totally Evaluate Hillary On Her Record, Not Her Name »

Posted in GOP | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Pope’s Climate Encyclical Leaked, About As Far Left As Expected

By William Teach June 16, 2015 – 6:56 am

Members of the Cult of Climastrology, mostly comprised of far left Progressives (nice fascists) are thrilled by what the Pope will supposedly say regarding Hotcoldwetdry

(Guardian) Pope Francis will this week call for changes in lifestyles and energy consumption to avert the “unprecedented destruction of the ecosystem” before the end of this century, according to a leaked draft of a papal encyclical. In a document released by an Italian magazine on Monday, the pontiff will warn that failure to act would have “grave consequences for all of us”.

Francis also called for a new global political authority tasked with “tackling … the reduction of pollution and the development of poor countries and regions”. His appeal echoed that of his predecessor, pope Benedict XVI, who in a 2009 encyclical proposed a kind of super-UN to deal with the world’s economic problems and injustices.

So, more global governance, more control of people’s lives. Authoritarianism.

According to the lengthy draft, which was obtained and published by L’Espresso magazine, the Argentinean pope will align himself with the environmental movement and its objectives. While accepting that there may be some natural causes of global warming, the pope will also state that climate change is mostly a man-made problem.

“Humanity is called to take note of the need for changes in lifestyle and changes in methods of production and consumption to combat this warming, or at least the human causes that produce and accentuate it,” he wrote in the draft. “Numerous scientific studies indicate that the greater part of the global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases … given off above all because of human activity.”

Will Pope Francis, and all those who are squeeing over this pronouncment, agree to give up their own modern lifestyles? No fossil fuels, no ice makers, only buying local, handwashing clothes, etc? How much power does Vatican City use? The encyclical blames fossils directly as part of the problem? Will the Pope cancel his upcoming fossil fueled airplane trips?

The leak has frustrated the Vatican’s elaborate rollout of the encyclical – a papal letter to bishops – on Thursday. Its release had been planned to come before the pope’s trip to the US, where he is due to address the United Nations as well as a joint meeting of Congress.

Huh. So he planned to blame fossil fuels right before taking that fossil fueled airplane trip. Weird, right?

The pope will also single out those obstructing solutions. In an apparent reference to climate-change deniers, the draft states: “The attitudes that stand in the way of a solution, even among believers, range from negation of the problem, to indifference, to convenient resignation or blind faith in technical solutions.”

I wonder if Pope Francis has ever heard the statement “you catch more flies with honey than vinegar”? Of course, if he’s still taking fossil fueled flights, that would make him a denier, as it would all the other CoC members who haven’t gone carbon neutral.

I wonder if Pope Francis can explain this

Doesn’t look like much, does it? A flat line going back from May 2016. If one continued back, they’d see a spike for around 16 years. Then a long slight cooling period. Then a big spike. Then a pause. All the way back to the Little Ice Age. The current Pause mostly invalidates the computer models of doomy warming, hence the reason for the 70+ excuses, along with the “adjustments” to past data.

But, hey, if Pope Francis is really into the loss of personal freedom to the Cult of Climastrology Progressives (nice fascists) based on junk science, he should start in his own life.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Pope’s Climate Encyclical Leaked, About As Far Left As Expected »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Hotcoldwetdry Will Totally Mean Boring Dinners In The Future Or Something

By William Teach June 15, 2015 – 6:37 pm

There’s actually two insane pronouncements in this bit of climabattery by Warmist Robert Weller, linked together

Op-Ed: Climate change could mean boring dinners

Polar bears are eating dolphins stuck in a sort of wormhole of ice created by climate change.

Global warming is reducing the diversity of the things we eat as creatures die or move away from their traditional habitats.

Now, Mr. Weller isn’t the only one Blamestorming “climate change” regarding a polar bear being seen “for the first time” eating a white dolphin. Amongst the inglorious nutjobs is Elizabeth Goldbaum at CBS “News” and Jillian Kestler-D’Amours at the Toronto Star. Mr. Weller goes a bit further in clima-insanity

“From a human perspective, the rapid climate change and accelerating biodiversity loss risks human security (e.g. a major change in the food chain upon which we depend, water sources may change, recede or disappear, medicines and other resources we rely on may be harder to obtain as the plants and fauna they are derived from may reduce or disappear, etc.),” reports Global Issues.

“Most of us in the well-fed world give little thought to where our food comes from or how it’s grown. We steer our shopping carts down supermarket aisles without realizing that the apparent bounty is a shiny stage set held up by increasingly shaky scaffolding. We’ve been hearing for some time about the loss of flora and fauna in our rain forests. Very little, by contrast, is being said or done about the parallel erosion in the genetic diversity of the foods we eat,” the magazine said.

A group operates what is called the Ghost Food Truck, going from place to place trying to show what the so-called “Gaia Theory” could mean. One simple definition is that the Earth will get even, saving itself before the humans or the whales.

Got that? Gaia is going to “get even” and make our dinners bland and boring.

BTW, nothing from the members of the Cult of Climastrology proves anthropogenic causation for the slight warming since 1850.

Read: Hotcoldwetdry Will Totally Mean Boring Dinners In The Future Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on Hotcoldwetdry Will Totally Mean Boring Dinners In The Future Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

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

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle having precious water wasted for cleaning, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on 10 questions Hillary won’t answer.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Today’s “Global Warming Causes Shark Attacks” Winner Is…

By William Teach June 15, 2015 – 12:00 pm

Typically, when certain things happen the Cult Of Climastrology jumps in and blames climate change. Now, this morning, I searched the usual suspects, and Twitter, but found nada, in regards to the terrible attacks that occurred at a North Carolina beach Sunday, which followed another attack a few days ago. I should have searched using global warming instead (via Doug Powers @ThePowersThatBe)

Sigh. I wonder if Dr Shelton realizes that Jaws is based on real attacks at the Jersey shore. In 1916. When CO2 was below the “safe level” of 350ppm.

Read: Today’s “Global Warming Causes Shark Attacks” Winner Is… »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Young People Are Really Confused Over Consent Signals

By William Teach June 15, 2015 – 10:21 am

Let’s think about this. Over the years, the far left has worked hard to destroy the mores of society. When it comes to sexual relations, they have been pushing notions that it is A-OK for young people (including teens and pre-teens) to be not just sexy, but be sexual. The Leftists and their Feminist subset have pushed for these young folks to not only show themselves being sexy, but to not worry about having sex. They teach this in schools, on the Internet, in movies and on TV, in person. They have no problem with casual, meaningless sex, consistently pushing the boundaries further and further, including for teens, who generally do not have the emotional makeup to deal with that. They say they like kids to be sexual, especially young women. Show it! Flaunt it! Be it! They push women to be hyper-sexual.

Yet, this has all come back to bite them in the posterior, in terms of the supposed culture of rape, especially on college campuses, which tend to be very liberal. Kids pushing the boundaries of sex, as they’ve been taught, and then liberals get upset that they achieved what they wished for

Deeply divided over consent signals

Many embrace “no means no.” They have grown familiar with another three-word standard, “yes means yes.” But America’s college students are deeply divided on how to read the unspoken language of sex.

What if someone undresses? Or gets a condom? Or nods in agreement?

In each of those scenarios, a Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll found, at least 40 percent of current and recent college students said the action established consent for more sexual activity. And at least 40 percent said it did not.

Conflict and confusion about consent pose enormous challenges for colleges scrambling to prevent sexual assault. Many have discovered they need a new curriculum just to teach incoming students about the do’s and don’ts of intimate communication.

One of the biggest problems: Men sometimes see a green light when women are signaling yellow or red.

I don’t really find Dave Chapelle that funny, but, he makes a good point.

The rest of the article exposes just how muddled the situation has become. No means no, yes means yes, no means maybe, yes means no, etc. Sexual assault is never OK, but, if you teach kids to be sexual creatures, to think that casual sex anytime is A-OK, if you teach kids without the emotional makeup to always want sex, and tell them there is nothing wrong with it, what, exactly, do you think will happen?

Read: Surprise: Young People Are Really Confused Over Consent Signals »

Posted in Liberal World | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Doom: Climate Change Causing Plants To Choke On Too Much Carbon

By William Teach June 15, 2015 – 8:24 am

The latest (and very convenient) pronouncement from the Cult of Climastrology

Climate Change: Plants Choke on too Much Carbon

It looks like even for plants, there can be too much of a good thing. Tree and flowers use carbon dioxide (C02) to make energy, absorbing the gas to help fuel the process of photosynthesis. For this reason, some experts have theorized that rising carbon levels will eventually promote plant growth. Now new research claims that this assumption is dead wrong.

That’s at least according to a study recently published in the journal Global Change Biology, which details how the plants in a number of very different ecosystems appear to actually suffer from too much carbon in the atmosphere.

Sample crops, grasslands, and forests all seemed to lose some ability to absorb nutrients when exposed to rising CO2 levels in large-scale field experiment held in eight countries across four continents.

“The findings of the study are unequivocal. The nitrogen content in the crops is reduced in atmospheres with raised carbon dioxide levels in all three ecosystem types,” Johan Uddling, a researcher with the University of Gothenburg, said in a statement.

How very convenient. I wonder how plant life deal with CO2 during the previous 450 million years, when the CO2 level was much higher than today?

The study found that both wheat and rice are already suffering from heightening carbon levels – a phenomenon (both man and nature-driven) that has been frequently described as impossible to stop.

The decline of wheat in particular has already been associated with a climbing global temperature, which can be blamed on climbing greenhouse gas levels.

There’s a little bit of a problem: wheat crops have been at record levels year after year after year. There is no decline in wheat, except in the fevered minds of Warmists. Soy also saw a record 2014, with rice and corn stayed flat (meaning that CO2 was not harming their production)

“We are seeing reduced nitrogen content even when growth has not been affected,” he explained. “Moreover, the effect is there in trials with powerful fertilizer, which indicates that it is not down to limited access to nitrogen in the soil. Future studies should look at what is causing the effect, but it appears to be linked to plants’ capacity to absorb nitrogen rather than to changed levels in the soil.”

So, wait, the explanation of doom from too much CO2 is too simple? It could be something else? There could be other factors in play?

The takeaway? Plants are more complicated than even scientists like to believe, and how climate change and its factors will impact them is still very much a mystery asking to be solved.

But, in order to deal with this mystery, we need to pass how pieces of legislation, international agreements, rules, and regulations, limiting personal freedom, giving Government more and more control of our lives, control of private entities, and control of economies.

Read: Doom: Climate Change Causing Plants To Choke On Too Much Carbon »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove