If All You See…

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

…is a farm that you hope only uses horse power, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post gay and straight traffic lights.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Surprise: Climate Change Is Really About Progressive Politics

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

I know, you’re totally shocked that “climate change” really has little to do with science

6 ways to promote economic equality and climate action at the same time

At a rally in front of the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and fellow liberal Democrats such as Rep. Barbara Lee of California unveiled a national agenda for greater economic equality. The 13-point “Progressive Agenda,” which was heavily influenced by Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz’s new 100-page report for the Roosevelt Institute on policy solutions to income inequality, is a left-wing wish list meant to echo Newt Gingrich’s 1994 Contract with America.

“The Progressive Agenda” includes plenty of popular, and populist, ideas, from raising the minimum wage to mandating paid employee sick leave. The emphasis is on correcting a system that has been rigged for the benefit of corporations and the wealthy, particularly through the tax code, and replacing it with a fairer system that rewards labor rather than just wealth. The agenda would do a lot to help the U.S. catch up to the policies of other developed countries that have more equitable income and wealth distributions.

Notably absent, though, is practically anything to do with the fossil fuel economy, suburban sprawl, and the policies that prop them up, which are bad for both regular Americans and the climate. De Blasio’s agenda contains a token reference to environmental protection, along with labor rights, as something that shouldn’t be sacrificed to global trade deals. Stiglitz makes brief mention of a carbon tax. But many sources of inequality related to the dirty energy economy — and sources of opportunity that arise from a shift to a clean economy — go unmentioned.

Then we get as the money quote

To help progressive leaders develop such a plan, here’s a list of six policies that would help cut carbon pollution, clean up the air, strengthen our cities, and redistribute tax dollars from fossil fuel companies and rich individuals to the poor and middle class.

The ideas are exactly what you’d expect, long on fossil fuels hatred, a carbon tax, eliminating the home mortgage deduction (because you evil people buy homes in the suburbs, which is Bad for Hotcoldwetdry), and others, along with shifting all the money to people who haven’t earned it. If you really pay attention to what Cult of Climastrology members say and push, it’s easy to see that this whole movement has everything to do with Progressive politics and nary a thing to do with science.

Read: Surprise: Climate Change Is Really About Progressive Politics »

Posted in Global Warming, Progressive Goals | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

We Face A Mad Max World Unless We Tackle “Climate Change” Or Something

By William Teach May 15, 2015 – 7:01 am

So says Charlize Theron. And, yes, she’s serious

(UK Guardian) The actor Charlize Theron, who takes a leading role in the new Mad Max movie as a one-armed warrior driving five sex slaves to safety, has expressed her fears that a bleak future awaits the planet unless global warming is addressed.

The film is set 45 years in the future, in a post-apocalyptic world desperately short of water and fuel and ruled by a barbaric dictator who enslaves men and imprisons women for breeding and breast-milk.

“It felt very grounded in real events,” said Theron at a press conference for the film, which opens worldwide this week, following its gala premiere at Cannes on Thursday. “The idea of globalisation and global warming and drought and the value of water, and leadership becoming completely out of hand.”

Say, I wonder how much energy and fossil fuels were used during the filming of the movie? How many plastic bottles of water were consumed and discarded? The use of hair dryers and ice makers, air conditioning and non-locally grown food? How did all the folks involved in the movie, including Ms. Theron, get Namibia, where a goodly chunk of the movie was filmed? How much energy and fossil fuels will be used to not only distribute the film for viewing, but be used to move viewers to the theaters? How much food will be wasted at the theaters? How did Ms. Theron travel to the premiere of the movie? Unfortunately, the Guardian failed to ask Ms. Theron (a fantastic actress) those questions.

Theron said that when she first watched a scene in the film depicting a terrifying thunder-and-sandstorm she wondered if it was a little far-fetched. “But there are images on Google right now of Sahara desert sand being blown, in that state, all through Africa. And that’s frightening. The hair lifted up on the back of my neck. What makes [the film] even scarier is that it is something that is not far off if we don’t pull it together.”

BTW, the original Mad Max was about the end result of a nuclear conflict.

My life fades. The vision dims. All that remains are memories. I remember a time of chaos… ruined dreams… this wasted land. But most of all, I remember The Road Warrior. The man we called “Max.” To understand who he was, you have to go back to another time… when the world was powered by the black fuel… and the desert sprouted great cities of pipe and steel. Gone now… swept away. For reasons long forgotten, two mighty warrior tribes went to war, and touched off a blaze which engulfed them all. Without fuel they were nothing.

Hence the reason no one was living in cities.

Read: We Face A Mad Max World Unless We Tackle “Climate Change” Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: Stop Illegal Alien Detention

By William Teach May 15, 2015 – 6:43 am

Things that are Super Important In Liberal World

(NY Times) Of all the malfunctioning parts in the country’s broken-down immigration machinery, probably the most indefensible is the detention system.

This is the vast network of jails and prisons where suspected immigration violators are held while awaiting a hearing and possible deportation. Immigrant detainees are not criminal defendants or convicts serving sentences. They are locked up merely because the government wants to make sure they show up in immigration court.

That’s  a pretty good reason, since roughly 30-40% of illegals never appear, and the number of no-shows increased 153% over the past four years.

Detention is intended to help enforce the law, but, in practice, the system breeds cruelty and harm, and squanders taxpayer money. It denies its victims due process of law, punishing them far beyond the scale of any offense. It shatters families and traumatizes children. As a system of mass incarceration — particularly of women and children fleeing persecution in Central America — it is immoral.

Here’s a better idea: just deport them. Also, stop them from coming across the border in the first place. Oh, wait, many of these detainees are illegals caught crossing the border illegally. Because of idiot laws made by pro-illegal supporters law enforcement can’t simply drop them off across the border. Now the NY Times wants to release even more into the U.S. Who end up being a drain on taxpayer money. Then the NY Times and Democrats demand that they be made citizens. Weird how that works, eh?

A powerful case for ending immigration detention, along with an array of alternatives, is made in a new report from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Center for Migration Studies. It traces how the system has grown immense, from housing 85,000 detainees in 1995 to more than 440,000 in 2013. There are many reasons for this growth, including state and local immigration crackdowns, federal dragnet programs like Secure Communities and the flood of money from Congress to the private prison operators that have profited so fruitfully from immigrant criminalization. The system has gotten more sprawling and scandal-prone, but reforms don’t stick. The notorious Hutto family detention center in Texas, where children went to classes in prison scrubs, stopped housing families. But the surge of families at the border seeking refuge last year created a political crisis and led the department to resurrect family detention, with new centers with thousands of prison beds for mothers and children.

What all this actually shows is that our government, along with Useful Idiots like certain Social Justice Warrior groups and the NY Times, are doing all they can to entice illegals to come to the U.S. illegally, along with overstaying their visas. But, the Times has a plan!

Ending mass detention would not mean allowing unauthorized immigrants to disappear. Supervised or conditional release, ankle bracelets and other monitoring technologies, plus community-based support with intensive case management, can work together to make the system more humane. But neither Congress nor the Homeland Security Department has embraced these approaches, which would be far cheaper than locking people up.

If they aren’t criminals, why would they still be treated as such, Senor NY Times? Of course, none of these methods will stop the majority of the illegals from disappearing into the nation. Which is exactly what the NY Times and Democrats want. Then, they push for legalization. Notice that nowhere does the Times recommend quick deportation immediately after caught.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times: Stop Illegal Alien Detention »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Say, When It Comes To “Climate Change”, What Can Cultists Do?

By William Teach May 14, 2015 – 4:09 pm

The solutions are very simple

(aNewsCafe) Climate Change is bearing down on us, accelerating month by month. Simply put, it’s all about carbon in the atmosphere. Carbon up = global warming; Carbon down = global cooling.

If only it was that simple. Especially since we’re discussing carbon dioxide, not carbon. But, hey, don’t let scientific facts get in the way of a good bit of moonbattery.

Individually, we can do some things, and collectively, some things we have to do. For those of us who are concerned but sometimes feel overwhelmed and perplexed, here are some ideas based on experience:

Here they are

  • Grow lots of food. It saves money, provides exercise and, since we don’t use chemical fertilizers or pesticides, it’s friendly to the environment.
  • Process lots of fruits and vegetables. We can and dry mostly because freezing uses energy and besides we often lose track of what we have in the freezer.
  • Avoid packaged processed food. We mostly buy fresh or bulk, so we don’t have to worry about plastics leaching into our food or throw out tons of plastic packaging that often finds its way into the sea and fish.
  • Prepare and cook from scratch so we have no need to heat up packaged food.
  • Avoid factory-farmed meat because of the packaging and because of environmental damage at the feedlots.
  • Reduce our water by using garden drip tapes and low-flow showerheads and toilets. Urban gardeners need to advocate for special water rates for growing food.
  • Reduce electric usage with compact fluorescent bulbs and a low energy refrigerator.
    Shop at and donate to Thrift Stores.
  • Practice the 4-R: ReUse, RePurpose, RePair, ReCycle.
  • Reduce number of car trips. We bundle the need to travel, for shopping and meetings. No single purpose car trips.
  • Study CC and organize presentations so I can write articles. Instead of talking, I would sing but I can’t carry a tune. (Use your individual talents to make a difference.)
  • Vote Climate Change. We would like to identify politicians who will work to mitigate for climate change. As 350.org founder Bill McKibben says, “First change your politicians, then worry about your lightbulbs.” (pg 252 A. Leonard in Is Sustainability Still Possible?)

Can anyone guess what’s missing? That’s right, giving up use of fossil fuels in their own lives. Weird how they don’t actually want to stop the one thing they claim is the worst in their own lives.

As for the last, is it unsurprising that this ends with politics? That’s always the end point.

Read: Say, When It Comes To “Climate Change”, What Can Cultists Do? »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 31 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 14, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible puppy which will use too many resources which causes tornadoes, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on not being someone till you’re listed by the SPLC.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Vox Offers 6 Reasons Conservatives Should Totally Take Hotcoldwetdry Seriously

By William Teach May 14, 2015 – 11:39 am

You’ll be shocked to learn that not one of them has anything to do with science, and, instead, are pretty much all about politics

(Vox) Jerry Taylor worked at the libertarian Cato institute for decades; for most of that time, he was a climate skeptic himself. But five or six years ago, a series of discussions convinced him that climate change is a serious problem and that conservatives need a policy answer. Now he’s heading up a new libertarian organization, the Niskanen Center, and has released a policy brief arguing “the conservative case for a carbon tax.” I interviewed him last week about right-leaning opinion on climate change, his tax proposal, and the political road forward. (Part 1; part 2.)

You should read the whole thing! But here are the top six takeaways.

They are

  1. Financial markets deal with risks like climate change all the time.
  2. The right’s thought leaders are beginning to shift away from the GOP’s denialism.
  3. Most Republicans are already on board with climate action.
  4. All that’s needed now is some Republican leadership.
  5. The proper level of carbon tax is likely beyond what politics can currently bear …
  6. … but wouldn’t take a very high carbon tax to do better than the status quo.

So, all politics, no science. Surprise!

As to 2 through 4, unlike Lefties, those on the Right don’t blindly follow the crowd, and we expect our elected officials to listen to us, not have the elected officials dictating the way we should think.

For the last two, what in the world makes Vox and the other Warmists think that a carbon tax in any way is a reason Conservatives should believe in “climate change”?

Read: Vox Offers 6 Reasons Conservatives Should Totally Take Hotcoldwetdry Seriously »

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

Interesting: First Solar Energy Road Doing Better Than Anticipated

By William Teach May 14, 2015 – 9:40 am

I actually almost find myself in total agreement with this Climate Progress article

In its first six months of existence, the world’s first solar road is performing even better than developers thought.

The road, which opened in the Netherlands in November of last year, has produced more than 3,000 kilowatt-hours of energy — enough to power a single small household for one year, according to Al-Jazeera America.

“If we translate this to an annual yield, we expect more than the 70kwh per square meter per year,” Sten de Wit, a spokesman for the project — dubbed SolaRoad — told Al Jazeera America. “We predicted [this] as an upper limit in the laboratory stage. We can therefore conclude that it was a successful first half year.” (big snip)

Though the Netherlands’ solar road seems to be going as planned, solar roads overall typically aren’t as effective at producing energy as solar arrays on a house or in a field. That’s because the panels in solar roads can’t be tilted to face the sun, so they don’t get as much direct sunlight as panels that are able to be tilted. However, solar roads don’t take up vast tracts of land, like some major solar arrays do, and they can be installed in heavily-populated areas.

I’ve said before and I’ll say again, I think these kinds of projects are great ideas, and should be supported. Not for “climate change”, but simply for the reason that we should take advantage of “free” energy, such as solar energy, and use it. In this case, the energy should be used to provide lighting for the bike roadway. Paving helps create the Urban Heat Island Effect: why not offset it by using the roadway to produce energy?

The energy produced is rather low for solar panels, yet, the point of using roadways is still a good one. Of course, the cost needs to come down quite a bit. It supposedly cost $3.3 million to create this half mile of bike roadway. You could power quite a few homes for that chunk of change.

There are other projects out there to produce energy from roadways, both by turning them into solar receptors and from driving over the roadways. IMO, these projects should be supported if they show promise.

Read: Interesting: First Solar Energy Road Doing Better Than Anticipated »

Posted in Energy, Environment | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Columbia U Snowflakes Want Trigger Warnings For Greek Mythology

By William Teach May 14, 2015 – 8:00 am

The cost to attend Columbia University is over $60,000 a year, including the required fees beyond tuition. Not to mention the cost of food, books, etc. This is what parents are getting for their money

Columbia students claim Greek mythology needs a trigger warning

“Not far from the walls of Enna, there is a deep pool,” begins Ovid’s version of the rape of Persephone. “While [Persephone] was playing in this glade, and gathering violets or radiant lilies, while with girlish fondness she filled the folds of her gown, and her basket, trying to outdo her companions in her picking, [Pluto], almost in a moment, saw her, prized her, took her: so swift as this, is love.”

The Greek myth has been recounted for thousands of years in hundreds of languages, scores of countries and countless works of art. It’s considered a cultural touchstone for Western civilization: a parable about power, lust and grief.

Now, however, it could be getting a treatment it’s never had before: a trigger warning.

In an op-ed in the student newspaper, four Columbia University undergrads have called on the school to implement trigger warnings — alerts about potentially distressing material — even for classics like Greek mythology or Roman poetry.

Sadly, this is not a joke. This is not a hoax. They are Completely Serious.

In their op-ed, the Columbia undergrads — all women of color — recount the story of another female student.

“During the week spent on Ovid’s ‘Metamorphoses,’ the class was instructed to read the myths of Persephone and Daphne, both of which include vivid depictions of rape and sexual assault,” they write. “As a survivor of sexual assault, the student described being triggered while reading such detailed accounts of rape throughout the work. However, the student said her professor focused on the beauty of the language and the splendor of the imagery when lecturing on the text. As a result, the student completely disengaged from the class discussion as a means of self-preservation. She did not feel safe in the class. When she approached her professor after class, the student said she was essentially dismissed, and her concerns were ignored.”

The students then call on Columbia to “issue a letter to faculty about potential trigger warnings and suggestions for how to support triggered students” and institute “a mechanism for students to communicate their concerns to professors anonymously, as well as a mediation mechanism for students who have identity-based disagreements with professors.”

I think we call all empathize, but, this is fiction. And, seeing as how “trigger warnings” have been vastly overused (read the full WP article for a discussion on that) and seem to be a way to simply shut down any and all discussion/material/displays that people, 99.99% of whom are Liberals, do not like, it is very difficult to take seriously. I find that opinion pieces at the Washington Post and NY Times (and most Liberal news outlets) “trigger” me. Yet, I do not want them shut down or to come with warnings. Because I’m an adult. But, perhaps Rep. Alan Grayson should come with trigger warnings.

What we’re doing is creating a huge segment of the population that is completely unable to deal with anything that makes them a little bothered. These snowflakes want to live in a bubble world, and, if you upset them, they get angry and/or upset and need to retreat to “safe room” with coloring books like 3 year old, and want “warnings”. And will possibly sue

“The hyperbolic language of trauma that’s used! Sheesh,” wrote Elizabeth Nolan Brown in Reason. “Apparently this discussion of Ovid was so threatening it was a matter of self-preservation to ignore it. If that’s really true—if the mere discussion of rape causes this student to feel panicked and physically unsafe—than she needs help treating severe post-traumatic stress disorder, not a f—— trigger warning.”

“Op-eds like this are a call for academic vandalism, defacing culture and history with the ugly graffiti of modern class, race, and sex-war politics,” John Hayward wrote in a Breitbart blog titled “Campus special snowflakes melt upon contact with Greek mythology.”

In the case of the Columbia students, however, they say they want more discussion, not less. A trigger warning on Ovid’s “Metamorphoses” might help a student who has suffered sexual assault stay engaged by offering her a chance to discuss the brutality in the text — not just its beauty.

No, what they really want is to shift all the material away from the core material and to all their gripes, which would mean just dropping the material altogether, which is the point. Anything that Offends must be discarded. This is a generation of fragile snowflakes, who demand they be coddled. Do we need to put a “trigger warning” on life itself? How will these snowflakes survive when they hit the Real World? Businesses do not feature “safe spaces”. These special snowflakes won’t be allowed to hang in the back with their coloring books and soft dolls when the boss gets on them for failing to do the job.

From the comments

We are talking the same colleges where the likelihood of experiencing sexual assault and drunken, debauched behavior makes the ancients pale in comparison, right?

I believe there should be trigger warnings… on the college application forms, that the potential student will encounter new and potentially disturbing ideas, themes, memes, depictions, and practices… all from fellow students.

Meanwhile, at the University Of Colorado Boulder, officials have told students to report any “hurtful statements”. Special snowflakes. Which could be illegal and an invasion of privacy.

Read: Columbia U Snowflakes Want Trigger Warnings For Greek Mythology »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Liberal World | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Editorial Board: Pour More Money Into Infrastructure To Prevent Next Train Tragedy

By William Teach May 14, 2015 – 7:29 am

You might be aware of Liberals blaming a supposed lack of infrastructure spending for the crash of the AMTRAK train in Philly (say, whatever happened to the $800 billion Stimulus, as well as all the smaller stimulus packages during the first few years of Obama’s reign?), as well as attempting to blame Republicans in multiple ways (many easy examples at Twitchy, including here, here, and here). We even know the actual cause. The Washington Post knows the actual cause. Heck, even the Washington Post Editorial Board knows the cause, and they still drive to the corner of Disgraceful Road and Bat Guano Insane Lane

Prevent the next train tragedy
The Philadelphia train crash is a reminder of the need to invest more in U.S. infrastructure. (WT note: that subhead is from the WP front page)

IT’S NOT yet clear why Amtrak Northeast Regional Train 188 derailed Tuesday night, killing seven and wounding more than 200. The National Transportation Safety Board said Wednesday afternoon that the train was traveling more than 100 mph in a 50 mph zone in North Philadelphia, where the tracks take a sharp turn.

So, everyone knows that the train was going double the speed limit, including the WPEB, but the WPEB is unsure what caused the crash? Would this be considered Amtrak Trutherism? It’s certainly a way for the WPEB to push Talking Points

At first glance, in other words, this would appear to be a story of human failure. But no matter what the investigation yields, there almost certainly will be lessons about the United States’ negligent stewardship of its roads, rails, bridges and tunnels.

There’s no doubt we could do more for the road. Funny how the Liberal push to mandate better fuel economy, hybrids, and electric vehicles has reduced the available money via gas taxes. Say, whatever happened to all the Stimulus money? Oh, right, repaving roads that didn’t need repaving, painting bridges instead of fixing them, money wasted on signs talking up the Stimulus, and general mismanagement. Has anyone asked Joe Biden, who was nominally in charge of the Stimulus money?

Amtrak long ago should have installed automatic safeguards against reckless driving on a route like the Northeast Corridor, which is heavily trafficked and passes through dense urban centers. The technology exists. But Amtrak hasn’t finished installing its “positive train control” system, even along its busiest line.

Go that? It’s the fault of those who haven’t finished installing the system, not the people/person who had the train going double the speed limit into a curve.

Their most basic task is to put the transportation budget on sound footing, which Congress has failed to do, year after year. The Highway Trust Fund relies on the federal gasoline tax to finance all sorts of transportation needs, but the revenue stream hasn’t covered the country’s spending requirements for years. The obvious solution is to raise the gas tax, which has been at the same level since 1993. But neither President Obama nor Congress has the courage to say this aloud. Legislators are poised to patch together several billion dollars to keep the fund solvent for a short while longer, while they continue to debate second-best solutions. Instead, they should fix the problem now. Congress also should reduce the time and hassle it takes to get infrastructure projects approved.

Interesting. Didn’t I just mention the gas tax issue? In all honesty, I hadn’t even read to this part of the editorial when I wrote about the gas tax above. Anyhow, it was government which created the loss of revenue, as mentioned by me, and the WPEB has ignored that “why”, so the obvious solution is to raise the tax, which is almost always the solution for everything in Liberal World. Strange how they never recommend that the money raised should be spent wisely and responsibly.

They go on to recommend more “investment” in the Northeast Corridor train service. Fine. Great. All these mostly Democrat states should spend the money for the service that is primarily used in their own states. They even complain at Obama for pissing away money on high speed rail in a mish mash manner (the complaint is surely raaaaacist, since any complaint aimed at O is raaaaacist). This is a great argument for the reduction of the power of the federal government when it comes to spending, putting that power back into the hands of the States, along with the money. People closer to the issues know (generally) how to better spend the money on the projects needed most.

Such steps would not lessen the burden of Tuesday night’s tragedy. They might prevent others, however.

In other words, the WPEB is simply taking advantage of a tragedy to push their politics. Shameful.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Editorial Board: Pour More Money Into Infrastructure To Prevent Next Train Tragedy »

Posted in Journalistic Malpractice, Unhinged Tools | 10 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove