Climate Stations Show A 10 Year U.S. Cooling Trend

By William Teach June 17, 2015 – 10:13 am

Obviously, members of the Cult of Climastrology will have two main complaints. First, we’ll hear about how this is “cherry picked”, because they don’t seem to have a grasp of the concept of working back from now. Second, they’ll yammer on about the US only being two percent of the globe.

(Daily Caller) Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

The climate stations use three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation to provide “continuity of record and maintenance of well-calibrated and highly accurate observations,” NOAA states on its website. “The stations are placed in pristine environments expected to be free of development for many decades.” In essence, NOAA chose locations so they don’t need to be adjusted for “biases” in the temperature record.

Here’s what it looks like

Is the trend “statistically significant”? That’s debatable, being a decrease of .61 degrees F in 10 years. But, the actual hard data does show a decrease.

Does it mean cooling is coming? Not necessarily. What it does show is that computer prognostication models continue to fail, models based on Mankind being mostly/solely at fault for the warming of whichever period the Cult decides to use, such as 1980 to 1996. Now that’s cherry picking.

Read: Climate Stations Show A 10 Year U.S. Cooling Trend »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

There Are Big Divisions In Catholicism Over “Climate Change”

By William Teach June 17, 2015 – 8:05 am

These divisions mirror the general public, and there’s actually a big reveal in the data

Catholics Divided Over Global Warming
Partisan Differences Mirror Those Among General Public

On the eve of a forthcoming encyclical by Pope Francis on the environment and climate change, a new Pew Research Center survey finds that U.S. Catholics’ views on global warming are broadly reflective of American public opinion writ large; a solid majority believe that Earth is warming, but there is much more division over the cause and seriousness of climate change. Moreover, the poll shows that climate change is a highly politicized issue that sharply divides American Catholics, like the U.S. public as a whole, mainly along political party lines.

About seven-in-ten U.S. Catholics (71%) believe the planet is getting warmer. Nearly half of Catholic adults (47%) attribute global warming to human causes, and a similar share (48%) view it as a very serious problem.

But more than eight-in-ten Catholic Democrats say there is solid evidence that Earth is warming, compared with just half of Catholic Republicans.1 And while six-in-ten Catholic Democrats say global warming is a man-made phenomenon and that it poses a very serious problem, only about a quarter of Catholic Republicans agree.

Among the U.S. public as a whole, belief that global warming is occurring is nearly twice as common among Democrats as Republicans (86% vs. 45%). The view that global warming is caused by human activity is roughly three times as common among Democrats as among members of the GOP (64% vs. 22%), as is the view that it represents a very serious problem (67% vs. 21%).

First, I’m wondering how any Democrat can be a Catholic, as the majority support abortion on demand. They don’t listen to the Pope on most issues, why should they listen to the Pope on this?

Second, we see that 68% believe that the Earth is warming. Count me among those who have that belief, and the raw data and facts support that belief.

But, notice that only 45% of the general public believe that it is caused by human activity. Unfortunately, it is rarely, if ever, asked as to the percent that Mankind is responsible for. Some may say a little (put me in that box). Cult of Climastrology members will say that Mankind is mostly/solely responsible, which seems to be the same feeling from Pope Francis. That said, after 25+ years of “spreading awareness”, only 45% believe the current warm period is caused by human activity.

And only 46% believe it is a serious problem. Look, even some of those who believe that the current warm period is mostly/solely caused by nature are concerned. Changes in the climate can have good and bad effects. Again, though, after 25+ years of agitation this is the best that the CoC can do. 46%.

A big fail. Especially since all those who profess to believe that Mankind is at fault fail to live their lives like there is a crisis.

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/611137800977711104

I don’t expect a reply. Almost no Warmists ever do.

 

Read: There Are Big Divisions In Catholicism Over “Climate Change” »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Say, This Obama Guy Should Strike Back Overy Cyber Hacks

By William Teach June 17, 2015 – 7:38 am

OK, the Washington Post Editorial Board doesn’t exactly say Obama should do something, but that whoever is supposed to be in charge of the Executive Branch, whoever they are, should

A pathetic breach of responsibility on cybersecurity

BY ANY measure, the breach of Office of Personnel Management networks this year stands apart. It represents a failure of stewardship and a serious external threat.

After the OPM suffered a cyberintrusion in 2014, its director, Katherine Archuleta, asked Congress in February for $26 million in additional funding for cybersecurity. She said the agency stores more personally identifiable information than almost any other in the government, including banking data for more than 2 million people and background investigations for more than 30 million, among them individuals being considered for military enlistment, federal job appointments and employment by federal contractors. “It is imperative,” Ms. Archuleta wrote, that “the confidentiality of this information be secured to protect the identities, lives and livelihoods of these people, and the family members and associates identified as part of these records. The threats to identity theft, financial espionage, etc., are real, dynamic and must be averted.”

And, they were not averted, as we just saw the massive cyberintrusion, stealing information on roughly 4.2 million federal workers.

Now there is a lot of frantic closing of barn doors. The administration announced a “sprint” toward tighter cybersecurity measures. But how did it happen that a repository of such value and sensitivity was left vulnerable to theft in the first place? Both the Office of Personnel Management and the Department of Homeland Security, which is supposed to protect federal civilian networks, have a lot of explaining to do.

Say, I wonder who’s ultimately in charge of those departments? Who allowed this “pathetic breach of responsibility”?

For years, Chinese intruders, among others, have zeroed in on the U.S. government and its contractors, seeking scraps of information that could be used to pry open networks. Now the Chinese hackers must think they ha ve hit the jackpot. The stolen data and security forms could easily be leveraged to blackmail or pressure federal workers, including those who handle classified information, and might also compromise foreign nationals whose names are on those security forms.

The Chinese, and other hackers, have no fear whatsoever of America, thanks to the weakness of the Obama administration.

The breach also calls for a determined probe to identify the hackers and strike back. We don’t suggest this lightly. It seems to us that just slamming doors and building more firewalls may be an insufficient response to an assault of this magnitude. An essential aspect of deterrence is the credible threat of retaliation.

While I agree with the sentiment, the WPEB fails to state how America should strike back. The editorial mentions unleashing the US Cyber Command, but they are primarily involved in defense from cyber attacks. Should the US hack the heck out of those who hack the US? In my opinion, yes. What does the WPEB think? They don’t say. We certainly can’t arrest Chinese hackers in China. Do was launch military/special forces type attacks on the hackers? They don’t say.

In the Age of Obama, no one is afraid of America. Countries are not concerned with America fighting back. Americans are more concerned about their government coming after them then countries are concerned with retaliation. Teddy Roosevelt was correct when he said “Speak softly and carry a big stick”. This isn’t about passivity: it’s about making sure countries know that power can be unleashed. Instead, we have a community organizer with a silver tongue who has failed to grow beyond his community agitator skill set.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post: Say, This Obama Guy Should Strike Back Overy Cyber Hacks »

Posted in Current Affairs | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

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
Pirate's Cove